Venezulean Workers to "Seize" Companies

[Ben]

Someone explain to me again how Chavez is NOT a Communist? I realize I'm too dense to understand the mass media explanation of what a great guy he is.

---------------------------------

http://www.eluniversal.com/2005/09/08/en_pol_art_08A609637.shtml

Chávez followers are to seize 800 industries


Marcela Máspero, coordinator of pro-government National Workers' Union (UNT), said they are to seize approximately 800 companies they found to be inoperative, with the support of President Hugo Chávez' government.

"As a response to the attacks from neo-liberalism and capitalism, we are now going to use the mechanisms of workers. Now, together with communities, we are going to take over these industrial concerns. We cannot let the closure of companies to lead to the collapse of the productive apparatus."

Máspero explained they are going to ask the National Assembly for a decision declaring these companies as public property. In this way, actual owners would be prevented from using both facilities and equipment needed for a likely reactivation of production. Chávez followers have plans to resume production under the so-called co-management schemes allegedly sponsored by the Labor Ministry.
 
She indicated that eight plants have already been seized. Besides corn processing plant Probamasa, in south-western Barinas state, and one tomato processing plant of Heinz, in eastern Monagas states, pro-government labor activists, together with military officers and the relevant governors, have recently taken over facilities owned by Parmalat in western Zulia state; Parmalat, in western Lara state; Sideroca Proacero, in western Zulia state; Inveval, in Miranda state; Invepal, in central Carabobo state; and Fribarsa, in south-western Barinas state.

Regarding the lawfulness of these moves, the national coordinator of UNT claimed that "we seize the plant first, and then try to solve the issue of ownership, as there is always a reason for takeover."

[Guest]

I never thought there was any question that he was a Commie. I think the discussion has been whether we should actively work to remove a democratically elected Commie.

[The Rabbi]

We did with Allende, with the head guy in Granada, with Ortega in Nicaragua, etc.  It is a fine American tradition of removing authoritarian thugs who are terrorizing their own citizens.  I say go for it.

[Iain]

In China recently there has been a 'Pop Idol' type reality show, the public voting on this issue has caused speculation about whether a taste for democracy could develop amongst the people. A Chinese govt controlled media outlet mused as to why if democracy is such a great thing, the people voted for the one candidate who could not hold a tune.

Democratic countries can elect people that are hostile to the US, the UK, people that are hostile to the principle of democracy itself. Isn't that just democracy though? Or we saying that democracy isn't actually the principle that we are trying to achieve by pushing democracy? Seems to me that it isn't inevitable that democratic countries will be capitalist, Western and women friendly.

[Art Eatman]

If the plants are now inoperative, I guess some production is better than none.  However, odds are that the idea will lead to a wipeout of these 800 businesses, eventually.  I've never seen where businesses can remain successful without competent management, which the lower-level workforce can't do.

Art

[atek3]

oh jeez, venezuala is f'd.  I think we should extend green cards to any refugees that want to flee that socialist workers paradice.  Give Castro-lite, I mean Chavez a taste of Brain Drain.

atek3

[Sindawe]

We did with Allende, with the head guy in Granada, with Ortega in Nicaragua, etc.  It is a fine American tradition of removing authoritarian thugs who are terrorizing their own citizens.  I say go for it.

And replace them with an authoritarian thug who terrorizes his own citizens, but at least he's OUR thug.  And it worked SO WELL in in Chile and Iran, did'nt it?  Oh, Rabbi, the US did not remove Ortega from office.  He was voted out of office in 1990, and lost election runs in 1996 and 2001.

If the plants are truely idle, why should'nt the workers make a go of it.

[The Rabbi]

Well, Chile under Pinochet actually worked OK.  Not democracy exactly but the economy improved dramatically.  Iran.  Yes, I suppose the authoritarian theocratic regime is much better than the Shah.  Ask any of the millions of Iranian exiles in this country.
And Nicaragua?  No, the U.S. had nothing whatsoever to do with Ortega getting voted out.  Nothing at all.

[Sindawe]

Well, Chile under Pinochet actually worked OK.  Not democracy exactly but the economy improved dramatically.

Who cares about abuse of human rights and folks just "disappeared" so long as there is money to be made, eh?

Yes, I suppose the authoritarian theocratic regime is much better than the Shah.  Ask any of the millions of Iranian exiles in this country.

Yes, lets ask those who left to avoid being murdered by SAVAK

[Iain]

Pinochet - yep, a lovely man. People got pushed out of planes apparently.

I really detest the 'he may be a thug, but he's our thug' attitude. It flies in the face of all the nice platitudes we throw out about democracy and freedom. It means that we don't actually care about individual rights, so long as those individual rights aren't being trampled on by COMMUNISM. Then we get all excited, and jump in bed with the first anti-communist we can find, regardless of the results.

[Justin]

If the United States were smart, we would have stopped trying to force-feed democracy to the rest of the world years ago.

[Ben]

Personally, as time marches on, I'm becoming more and more of an Isolationist. To be both frank and harsh, I really don't care what happens to Venezuela one way or the other. However my main points for posting this story were:

1) That anytime 'The Workers " take things over, it's bad for business. The communal thing works well until some animals start becoming more equal than other animals (usually 24-48 hours).

2) That our media paints Chavez as God's gift to politics. Anyone that gives their blessing for confiscation and redistribution of property is anything but that in my book.

However I shouldn't be surprised he has a following with many in the mainstream media and in politics in our country. After all, based on a story posted over at THR, John Podesta said the following, which basically gives the finger to our country's founding principles, and the thumbs up to people like Chavez:

John D. Podesta, former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton and head of a leading Democratic think tank, says Democrats must start by casting Bush's brand of conservatism -- emphasizing an "ownership society" elevating individualism and private enterprise -- as fundamentally flawed and hostile to society's collective responsibility to help citizens, especially the neediest.

[mtnbkr]

If the United States were smart, we would have stopped trying to force-feed democracy to the rest of the world years ago.

It's a shame that this even needs to be said.  

Chris

[K Frame]

"Justin wrote:
If the United States were smart, we would have stopped trying to force-feed democracy to the rest of the world years ago.

It's a shame that this even needs to be said."



But everyone around the world deserves the opportunity to suckle at the sweet teat of libery.

They just don't know it yet.


The expansion of democracy was adopted as an active measure to counteract the expansionist policies of Communism starting after WW II. Before that, any expansion of democracy programs that the United States undertook (i.e., the Banana Wars in the 1920s, supporting Panamanian "independence" from Colombia so we could get the Canal Zone) were done largely for economic, not democratic, reasons.

[Silver Bullet]

My recollection is that some of the thugs we supported or installed in the past were done so to keep the communists out; the lesser of two evils.

Now that eastern Europe has abandoned communism, I would hope that we can afford to be a bit pickier about our friends.

[The Rabbi]

If the United States were smart, we would have stopped trying to force-feed democracy to the rest of the world years ago.

It's a shame that this even needs to be said.  

Chris

Yeah, our little brown brothers just can't handle it.  They are much better off under totalitarianism.

[mtnbkr]

Yeah, our little brown brothers just can't handle it.  They are much better off under totalitarianism.

You're the only one saying that.

were done largely for economic, not democratic, reasons

I don't believe any "democracy expansion program" was ever undertaken for purely altruistic reasons.  We go only to protect our own interests.  Otherwise, we would roll into North Korea or even China.

Chris

[K Frame]

The concept of "purely altruistic reasons" is a fantasy leveled on us by philosophers.

Everything is done with some expectation of either a reciprocal action or inaction, for either passive or active purposes.

That's as true of individuals as it is of government.

Cynical? Maybe.

Realistic? Yes.

[Iain]

Which is fine. As long as you admit it.

We say we want democracies but we want Western friendly goverments. If Western-friendly govts (or at least anti-Commie) can be achieved by other means we'll do it, sod all democratic principles.

It's the hypocrisy that bothers me.

[mtnbkr]

Which is fine. As long as you admit it.

We say we want democracies but we want Western friendly goverments. If Western-friendly govts (or at least anti-Commie) can be achieved by other means we'll do it, sod all democratic principles.

It's the hypocrisy that bothers me.

Exactly my point.  I'm not enlightened enough to care whether the rest of the world is free and fair as long as they do not interfere with us.  My problem is that our Govt likes to talk about spreading democracy as if it's a gift, when in fact they're only protecting our interests abroad.  Frankly, I wish we could get our own citizens as excited about freedom in the US as they are about freedom in other nations (Free Tibet?  How about we "free" DC first).

Chris

[The Rabbi]

Which is fine. As long as you admit it.

We say we want democracies but we want Western friendly goverments. If Western-friendly govts (or at least anti-Commie) can be achieved by other means we'll do it, sod all democratic principles.

It's the hypocrisy that bothers me.

Who has "admitted" to anything else??

The second part of this post makes no sense to me.
The U.S. ultimately did not support Marcos in the Philippines, even though the government that was likely to replace him (and did) announced they wanted the US out of Subic Bay.  So your theory is plain wrong.