For all who believe Chavez is a NWO puppet. You're wrong!!!

For all who believe Chavez is a NWO puppet. You're wrong!!!

Hugo Chavez is one of the leaders which goes against the criminal financial elite interests (FED, Central Banks, BIS, Rothschilds, Oil Corps....) unfortunetly there is no better way to reach that aim, as to nationalise the big business... but dont worry... you have to watch the people by what they're actions, not what they are saying!!!

Best wishes from Switzerland

lwwb
Roger

Ch‡vez calls for huge shake-up in Venezuela

Asks Venezuela's Congress for special powers and vows to strip central bank of autonomy as part of his 'socialist revolution.'

January 8 2007: 5:38 PM EST

CARACAS (Reuters) -- President Hugo Ch‡vez called on Venezuela's Congress on Monday to grant him special powers, launched a far-reaching package of nationalizations and promised to strip the central bank of its autonomy.

Ch‡vez has followed his landslide re-election last month with pledges to deepen what he calls a socialist revolution. The opposition says the anti-American leader is seeking to create a Cuban-style single-party state, a charge he refutes.

CNN's Karl Penhaul takes a look at the affiliated groups keeping Cuba's revolution alive. (January 4)

Ch‡vez said he would submit a "revolutionary enabling law" to lawmakers through which he would be able to pass bills by decree to accelerate economic reform.

"We are making the final revisions so we can send it to the National Assembly in the next few days to request special powers," he said in a speech at the swearing in of new cabinet ministers.

Ch‡vez, in power since 1999, said he would nationalize telecommunications firm CANTV (Charts) and unspecified energy companies in the fourth-biggest oil exporter to the United States.

"These disconcerting policy announcements represent a clear turn into deeper nationalist and interventionist policies, which can lead to further erosion of business confidence and the country's macro and institutional fundamentals," said economist Alberto Ramos in a Goldman Sachs research note.

State property
Continuing his nationalizing rhetoric, Ch‡vez said the heavy crude projects in the Orinoco Belt would become "state property," referring to plants that process heavy crude oil from the Orinoco region in eastern Venezuela to make it suitable for refining into fuel.

These Orinoco projects involve foreign companies such as Chevron (Charts), ExxonMobil (Charts), BP (Charts), Statoil and Conoco Phillips (Charts).

Venezuela has been pushing to have a majority stake in these projects, and it was not immediately clear whether Ch‡vez was suggesting something stronger with his call for them to become state property.

Ch‡vez said central bank autonomy could not continue and called the institution's independence "disastrous."

"The central bank must not be autonomous, that is a neoliberal idea," he said.

Ch‡vez has met resistance from central bank directors who object to the leftist president dipping into state coffers for lavish social spending of oil wealth, which wins him supporters but stokes rampant inflation.

The president has also sparred with the central bank over the calculation of Venezuela's 17 percent annual inflation. He wants data included from state-subsidized stores that would douse the runaway figures.

Ch‡vez is pulling the disparate parties that make up his government into a single party, sparking accusations that he is seeking a Communist-style system. He denies the charge, saying he will always allow opposition.

But, giving ammunition to those who say he is centralizing the state, he has said only those loyal to his movement can serve in the army or work in the giant state oil company.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/08/news/international/chavez.reut/index.htm

 

Hey, this world is so damn screwed up that anybody who is willing to try a positive alternative is welcome in my book. So what if some folks don't agree with his ways. There is no world leader anywhere who everyone agrees with. Let him experiment. If the majority of his countrymen like him, he's doing better than many. Perhaps he CAN find a better way to be. Would that be so bad? Some people just want to find something wrong with things they didn't think of themselves...

 

So Chavez is a communist after all.

 

Your definition of communisim?

 

What Chavez is wanting to do has already been done and failed in the Soviet Union and Cuba.

This is about him thinking just because he has oil wealth he can do whatever.

 

Then why does what he is doing look so much better than what it looked in Soviet Union and Cuba? Is it because of the present political climate in the US (which seems to be the biggest comparison) or is it the media making things look a certain way? I have NEVER understood why people were so scared of communism anyhow. I feel like I grew up with that word being thrown around like a catch-all phrase to describe anything that somebody doesn't like, but never actually got what the problem was. I've even looked up the "official" definition but the definition of communism does not jibe with things I have been led to believe and the attitudes which the word stirs up. I think that ANY political faction can be made good or bad depending on the morals and honor of those in power. I have a habit of looking at peoples ACTIONS instead of labels placed upon them. I don't see Chavez doing anything obviously wrong. He seems to be trying really hard to take a stand on the world stage and do something different, which is after all what is needed, to get things going in a different direction that the current one which is a failure... And it takes courage to do that. I see him as a brave and very intelligent man with alternative ideas. The only folks who seem to be upset by him are the rich who stand to get knocked down a peg or two. Way to go Chavez! If he were running for president HERE, I would vote for him...

 

The definition of communism is just theory. Yeah it sounds nice on paper to talk about establishing a classless,"equal" society for all but part of the problem is that Karl Marx didn't go into detail on how to accomplish all this.

There are reasons why most communist countries became totalitarian. To actually make communism work requires force because much of communism goes against human nature and basic economics.

Why don't you see hardly any communist countries today? Because it's been shown to be bad economics. Under communism there are no market prices for example. Market prices are used as an guide when it comes to production and making other business decisions. Communist price controls lead to shortages on various products where they were applied.

That's just a short,but there are many,numerous reasons why communism failed.

 

This goes into more details on the economic failings of communism/State-socialism.

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

" Economists believe that socialism failed for several reasons.

The first reason is called the information problem...

LINK

 

Wrong, it was because they were not communist and they didn't even say there were. USSR stood for Union Of Soviet Socialist Republics, socialism is different from communism.

Another point is what made the USSR "communist", occording to the western propaganda it was state ownership of land but this has nothing to do with the class relationships which is what Marx was talking about also state ownership of land existed in non-communist countries.

Logically the USSR was not communist, it was state-capitalist in that the state took over the role of the capitalist class.

Capitalism requires force, when workers challenge the capitalist system the state has police there to use force.

In free-market capitalism there are no plan, GM and Ford don't get together to figure out how many cars are needed, this leads to over investment and over production so it is extreamily inefficent.

Also under capitalism there has been plans, during WWII the US successfully planed its production and today technology makes planning easier.