The War On Democracy

[fucktopgirl]

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-3640791396816514186


Things we already know but good to refresh our memory of the chaos that did-still happen in south america.

[fucktopgirl]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76lZC_o95gE


for you who are able to make it to this manifestation.

[drizl]

i came on here to post a link to this vid. good work ftg.

[drizl]

its a shame chavez is so demonized here in america by our media and leaders.
his country is moving forward, but i recently heard from a peruvian friend that he has taken over a lot of the media since this movie came out. the rich elite minority are the ones who are scared and leaving the country, and the poor and impoverished majority are finally being heard and gaining power. i have heard stories of corruption and mishandling of the situation also. its a very difficult transition to defeat a totally corrupt and abusive false-democracy and take the power out of the hands of the elite, but i think it is truly happening and motivated by good reason and the desire for equality. but where it is going is unclear to me, it seems he is genuine as a leader, but some of his actions like granting himself supreme power over the national assembly and taking over media, and also rewriting and controlling the educational system seem a little shady. we'll see. i did love it when he mocked george bush talking about how he walks around like john wayne while he did a tough guy-machismo stroll. good to see you FTG:)

[fucktopgirl]

Good to see you two Mister.

And indeed, the liberation and the unification of Latin America is one tough job but , i think that the socialists are doing a great job so far and that the rich and filthy elite are running away, good fucking thing. Chavez is taking control of the situation and it is a good thing, his goals seem to be genuine and for the population of his country and his dream of this unification of south america is a great thing, his ideology ,Bolivarianism, sound good to me.

I am on the side of the people who want to stop the American hegemony and the neo-liberalism.

[drizl]

well put! i hope that it all happens. to me this feels like we are approaching a time of change in many places on many levels. we all need it.

[Schmeltz]

As I've said before it's certainly refreshing to see the ascendance of what appears to be a genuine populist movement with the goal of enhancing the quality of life of traditionally disenfranchised and disempowered social groups. And it's especially good to see such a movement flourish in a region noted for its historical tendency toward deep divisions between financially privileged and economically disadvantaged classes, and even to dare to hope that this emerging movement could constitute a valid and acceptable bulwark against the profound mismanagement (and outright murderous idiocy) that has dominated the leadership of the Western world for the past few years.

At the same time, there's a worrisome tone to both of your posts here:

the rich elite minority are the ones who are scared and leaving the country

the rich and filthy elite are running away, good fucking thing

It strikes me that this sentiment is totally at odds with democracy, and that this thread is somewhat ironically titled. There's two points I want to make:

1) Democracy is inclusive and universal. It does not involve the exclusion or outright persecution of a society's wealthiest citizens, irrespective of the divides that may separate their quality of life from that of the impoverished or the historical trajectories that may have produced this trend. People do not flee real democracy, they participate in it and compete to have their interests represented in the public sphere. The democratic civic tradition does not involve people leaving a country or society because their interests are not represented or accepted as valid.

2) When a society's wealthiest members pack up and leave, they deprive their country of origin of many things - not only their participation in allegedly democratic public life, as I said above, but also their extensive economic assets, their prospective access to high-quality education and the many associated social benefits that come with it, their capacity to serve as employers and similarly beneficial leadership roles, etc. It's just as bad as if all the blue-collar workers decided to leave and deprive the country of all their own collective assets and productive power. Chavez is shooting himself in the foot if he thinks his policies and indeed his country are better off without a vitally important sector of the citizenry.

It's all well and good to celebrate the emergence of a situation that attempts to redress historic wrongs and make good on the potential of a nation's resources to improve the lot of life of the common man. But that doesn't excuse a governing regime from all of the usual critical parameters and codes of conduct that apply to all aspiring democratic societies. There's standards to be maintained and Chavez, while succeeding dramatically on some fronts, is failing on others.

[fucktopgirl]

1) Democracy is inclusive and universal. It does not involve the exclusion or outright persecution of a society's wealthiest citizens, irrespective of the divides that may separate their quality of life from that of the impoverished or the historical trajectories that may have produced this trend. People do not flee real democracy, they participate in it and compete to have their interests represented in the public sphere. The democratic civic tradition does not involve people leaving a country or society because their interests are not represented or accepted as valid.

in the Chavez case, the mass population, the poors, were unheard, that was quite unethical but this is ok, right? There is still a elite , a bourgeoisie there but maybe they are less corrupted and are ready to do something for the mass. A bit more egalitarian


2) When a society's wealthiest members pack up and leave, they deprive their country of origin of many things - not only their participation in allegedly democratic public life, as I said above, but also their extensive economic assets, their prospective access to high-quality education and the many associated social benefits that come with it, their capacity to serve as employers and similarly beneficial leadership roles, etc. It's just as bad as if all the blue-collar workers decided to leave and deprive the country of all their own collective assets and productive power. Chavez is shooting himself in the foot if he thinks his policies and indeed his country are better off without a vitally important sector of the citizenry.

Like i said above...

Chavez chase the rotten men, it is a good thing.

It's all well and good to celebrate the emergence of a situation that attempts to redress historic wrongs and make good on the potential of a nation's resources to improve the lot of life of the common man. But that doesn't excuse a governing regime from all of the usual critical parameters and codes of conduct that apply to all aspiring democratic societies. There's standards to be maintained and Chavez, while succeeding dramatically on some fronts, is failing on others.

Is there any real true democracy anyway?

[Schmeltz]

in the Chavez case, the mass population, the poors, were unheard, that was quite unethical but this is ok, right? There is still a elite , a bourgeoisie there but maybe they are less corrupted and are ready to do something for the mass. A bit more egalitarian

I think you've missed the point. Whether the victims are wealthy or poor, advantaged or disadvantaged, in a purportedly democratic society there is never any justification for the disenfranchisement of any group of people. Simply reversing the direction of exclusion is not a solution, no more so than making white people pick cotton while black people lived in plantations would have constituted a resolution to American slavery. The key is to eliminate political exclusionism altogether, so that everyone stands equal before the law.



Like i said above...

Chavez chase the rotten men, it is a good thing

But I pointed out a number of problems associated with this course of action, direct hindrances that will be brought to bear on Venezuelan society if it is followed through. How is the accumulation of these problems a good thing, exactly? Because you don't like rich people and it feels good to see them get what they deserve? Isn't that a pretty superficial and insubstantial point of view?

[abcdefz]

It strikes me that this sentiment is totally at odds with democracy, and that this thread is somewhat ironically titled.




fuckedupgirl continues the war on intelligence.

[fucktopgirl]

[QUOTE=Schmeltz;1526995] The key is to eliminate political exclusionism altogether, so that everyone stands equal before the law.


INdeed, but did you not read what i just said? The rich fuckers that are deserting Venezuela is something good because they were ''rotten''. There is still a rich elite in this country less corrupted, i assume, therefore they will be able and willing to hear the pooor. They will be ok with money redistribution in the lower social spheres.


ostracizing bad apple does not go against democracy because the latter is all about equality, if you eliminate the ones that infringe this political ideology, therefore you are not only making the system more democratic and upgrading the life of the less fortunate.

[drizl]

i dont know of any modern-day democracy's that actually work perfectly. i have been reading "a pattern language" by christopher alexander (?) and there is a lot of good ideas about democracy and design in that book...anyone read it?

america is not a democracy that is for damn sure. the people are totally disconnected from every aspect of their governance- except for on a municipal level, but what good does that shit do when you have the feds flying over your marijuana patch with sub machine guns. a bad example maybe:P

i could go on about democracy all day, but in the end it doesnt matter. i will say this though- we need some serious change here in the states. and getting out of other countries business is a must. we are not making very many friends worldwide, and although it may not matter to some, now, in the future, it will. i hope these movements (like that in venezuela and bolivia) catch on like wildfire. i hope the rich run away and hide. bunch of fucking assholes anyway. hehe

[drizl]

fuckedupgirl continues the war on intelligence.

intelligence is overrated.

[Schmeltz]

[QUOTE]

i assume

Yeah, no shit.

Your assumptions, without any supporting information at all, are not enough to explain to me how expurgating an entire sector of a population (especially an influential group with many productive skills and assets) is a productive exercise, nor how such a course of action is actually in keeping with democratic principles. For there is in fact nothing democratic about "ostracizing bad apples," in the sense of forcing people to flee their own country, and to discern that you have only to look at any historical example of any society that did so. Hitler ostracized a whole lot of what he called "bad apples" from German society. How did that work out? In favour of democracy?

[fucktopgirl]

Yeah, no shit.

Your assumptions, without any supporting information at all, are not enough to explain to me how expurgating an entire sector of a population (especially an influential group with many productive skills and assets) is a productive exercise, nor how such a course of action is actually in keeping with democratic principles. For there is in fact nothing democratic about "ostracizing bad apples," in the sense of forcing people to flee their own country, and to discern that you have only to look at any historical example of any society that did so. Hitler ostracized a whole lot of what he called "bad apples" from German society. How did that work out? In favour of democracy?

HItler and Chavez are two different man with two different ideology. One is a fucking narcissistic nazi who did genocide; the other is a genuine socialist who have the population interest at heart.

[drizl]

productive people as in rich upper class folk who isolate themseves from the poor and live it up as their countrymen and women suffer and struggle to survive? there comes a point where things are just plan and simply unfair and need to be changed.

this is about a much larger picture than venezuela, it is about the struggle for native people against colonialism, against imperialism. and so long as chavez keeps to his word, it is about uniting all of south america against the agendas of other nations to exploit their populations.

is it right that we overthrow governments and replace their leaders with our own dictators, especially when these nations are just becoming democratic and gaining a hold on their own resources, their own right to live and be happy, and be heard? chile for example, venezuela for example, iran for example. is it right that we allow, and encourage our corporations to go into other countries and declare water privatized? (bolivia)

who is more wrong here? and who deserves better?

[Waus]

...Hitler ostracized a whole lot of what he called "bad apples" from German society. How did that work out? In favour of democracy?

Godwin's Law!! :eek:

[Schmeltz]

HItler and Chavez are two different man with two different ideology. One is a fucking narcissistic nazi who did genocide; the other is a genuine socialist who have the population interest at heart.

You're right... kind of. On the other hand, Hitler and Stalin were also two different men with two different ideologies who came from two very different cultures... and achieved much the same destructive results for their own societies. In fact you could compare many 20th-century tyrants with one another and find that although the ideological and cultural traditions of their societies were very different, the mechanisms they exploited in order to contravene the principles of democracy and perpetuate gross abuses of power on their own people were quite similar. So it doesn't really matter what political form a regime follows if it takes actions that contravenes the principles of democratic civics and the rights of the citizen. Same shit, different pile.

It's not any more right or proper if a liberal socialist does it. In other words.

this is about a much larger picture than venezuela, it is about the struggle for native people against colonialism, against imperialism. and so long as chavez keeps to his word, it is about uniting all of south america against the agendas of other nations to exploit their populations.

I think you're quite right in that Chavez' ascendancy represents merely one facet of a much larger global picture, another form of ethno-cultural backlash against the historically dramatic Western interventionism in any part of the world, whether it took the form of outright colonialist imperialism or murderous Cold War politics or latter-day internationalist corporate exploitation. So I'll say it again - it's very refreshing to see a significant mass cultural movement in opposition to the trends that dominate global discourse in our day and age, something that's not identified with either the pollution of the Western or Islamic traditions, a seemingly genuine populist revival of some of the best things about cooperative economics and indigenous culture.

Yes it is good for these things to have a voice - a voice with power, with influence, with resources.

But. There is a tragedy at work here in that it is possible to see warning signs - with direct historical precedents - that point to this voice being corrupted by all of the things that come with power, and influence, and resources. When a ruling body turns to the perpetuation of principles in direct opposition to the ideals that it is supposed to represent, how can you help but feel concerned? How can there be excuses made if there purports to be a true commitment to democracy, to common empowerment, to the actual devolution of political power? Creeping ideology is a poor subsitute for these things. The elimination of the dissenting voice from valid channels of discourse - from the formal branches of government, from direct participation in economic activity, through the manipulation of information, through the misuse of the security apparatus - is fundamentally undemocratic and is not a feature of a healthy society.

This isn't a matter of making excuses for corporatist imperialism or traditional class and power structures. It's not really even a matter of attempting to redress historical wrongs (which invariably seems to involve punishing a current generation for the crimes of their increasingly distant antecedents). This is about upholding the standards of democracy for everybody, whether left- or right-wing, in order to assure that democracy continues to be understood as the right of every citizen, regardless of background or origin, to participate fully in the formation and definition of the state. And of their own lives.

It's not about who is more wrong, but who is more right. Is Chavez any more right? Would you like to live under his government? I don't know that I would.

[drizl]

i wouldnt want to live under chavez right now either.

maybe they are in transition towards something better. maybe they are about to be fucked again, by their own leaders.

i still see hope in the situation. i think there is a lot of potential in the future, for people to connect and rebel against western influence. its inevitable that at one point there will be, on a massive scale. it might take some time still, but its not hard to see that there are many signs of this sort of downfall, and with time, only more people will become aware of the abuses of all governments. the only question is when?

[fucktopgirl]

War made easy

An awesome doc showing that the USA war propaganda has not change over time , that the lies being spelled to justify those war are pretty much the same throughout the usa presidency. All this make me think of the USA as little boy playing game with their toys. With the Hollywood industry, civilians and soldiers see themselves as if their were in a big movie.I think that is why there is not an population uprising, because on and on movies about war and heroes have been perpetuated into the conscience of the people making it acceptable, or normal, to go into another country and kill their population in the name of democracy. IN the name of good versus evil. Average American are proud of their country and their military industry, the patriotism is blind and ignorant thus allowing the elite to go on with their destructive and immoral plan of implementing justice and kill the evil in almost every country.

What a farce!!

The alliance with the government and the media is outrageous; this is the main tool that the military and the others pundits are using to disinform the mass population, telling them bedtime story about bad and good guys and terrorist hiding in alibaba cave.


I still cannot believe that people do, still to this day, are not aware of this major corruption, and this have consequence over all international relations.

Why are we letting this shit happening?

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-8383084962209910782&q=war+made+easy&total=492&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0