LOL Hip I’m sure I’m not the only one to notice you don’t answer the questions. You claim I’m trying to derail the thread, I ask for evidence and you claim that me asking for evidence is your ‘evidence’ I’m derailing the thread. Don’t you think such games are a little bit silly and rather childish? But you don’t have any evidence the thread is being derailed – (of course, except for ‘the evidence’ that someone asking you for your evidence is your ‘evidence’.) And now to the second question you seem to be refusing to answer - I’ve asked twice - What left wing ideas are you criticising? So far your criticisms all seem to be directed at Hugo Chavez not left wing ideas. If you have specific criticisms of left wing ideas please present them. * As I’ve said it seems to me that some on the right would like to paint all left wingers as Hugo Chavez’s of one shade or another. The problem is that it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny so Hip has taken this thread off on a tangent, and as is his want, is attacking the messenger since he’s unable to counter the message.
Mad But only those that didn’t know or had very little understanding of modern left wing views would describe ‘classical liberalism’ as of the ‘left’. So no Hip is very obviously of the right.
I've seen desperate arguments before but barging in and telling people that you have taken over the thread and everyone else is off topic? Balbus will now decide what is legitimately on topic and what is not for a thread he didn't even create? LOL! That's just sad. The tangent, Balbus, is you demanding that we get your approval to discuss the topic. Every single post you are making is a demand that I get you to approve the validity of the debate. Why would I need that? It seems like the left's definition of open and honest debate doesn't include having their ideas criticised. Its quite funny to see Balbus in a panic running around trying to distract attention. Its ironic that the topic of the debate is about how the left, like Chavez, shut down debate they don't like. Balbus responds by making 15 off topic comments in a row. Nothing to see here folks! Move along. I'm sorry your arguments don't stand up to scrutiny Balbus, but the fault is your own, there's no point in lashing out at other people in such a childish way. I think I speak for many here when I say that if you were to put more thought efforts into your post you could probably do better than this. The Danger of Hugo Chávez's Successful Socialism http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0407-23.htm Venezuela: Economic crisis and imperialist attacks pose new challenges for the revolution http://www.socialist.net/venezuela-economic-crisis-and-imperialist-attacks.htm
Hip I’m sure I’m not the only one to notice that yet again you don’t answer the questions. You claim I’m trying to derail the thread, I ask for evidence and you claim that me asking for evidence is your ‘evidence’ I’m derailing the thread. If you haven’t got any real evidence why are you making the claim? I’ve asked three times now - What left wing ideas are you criticising? So far your criticisms all seem to be directed at Hugo Chavez not left wing ideas. If you have specific criticisms of left wing ideas please present them.
I don't have much to say except Chavez can't have mean people on the internet making fun of him: http://thenextreporter.com/jg/venezuelas-president-regulate-internet/085314/
You are asking me to get your approval to call Hugo Chavez left wing. I don't need your approval. He is widely considered left wing, you are just being pointlessly argumentative. Is nationalising industry left wing? Are price controls and capital controls left wing? Are cooperatives left wing? Is allying with socialists around the world left wing? Is villifying the rich left wing? Is massive government spending on social programs left wing? In the future please don't waste my time until you have put some thought into your comments.
Well if other people have noticed they sure aren't saying anything about it. Perhaps this is just a cheap debating tactic where you continually say "answer the question" and when I do, you say "you haven't answered the question" and repeat endlessly, as if I need you approval before I can carry on discussing the subject? You've been known to resort to cheap debating tactics when your arguments won't stand up to scrutiny. Chavez is socialist and left wing and I gave many examples. If you can't refute them its not my problem. Congratulations though, seven pages of trying to derail debate - you must be nearing a personal record.
Oh please…again with the accusation about me trying to derail the debate and I suppose if I ask you for proof you’ll once again claim that me asking for proof is your proof. Why with the silly games Hip?
That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it, however misguided I might think it is. I on the other hand think he’s a demagogue who talks up his left wing credentials as a means to hold power. My point is that he acts like a demagogue rather than as a progressive left winger your argument is that he is a socialist and a left winger because you like to think of him as a socialist and a left winger. And I think you are doing that because you’d like to claim all socialists and left wingers are like Chavez.
Jesus christ Chavez is a socialist, he's a demagogue too, they're not mutually exclusive, just like Pinochet was a free marketer(to a point) and also a demagogue. Being authortarian transcends left/right.
My point is that he is a socialist and a left winger because he follows socialist and left wing policies, policies which I specifically named. Its sad to see you humiliating yourself like this. Not until Balbus says so.
Mad No Pinochet was a dictator who seized power through force not through a popular uprising or by elections. Chevez isn’t yet a dictator and holds his position through elections and has stayed in power by playing to a popular base. Demagogue comes from the Greek for ‘people’ and ‘leader’ a person that ‘leads the people’ while dictator comes from the Latin, ‘to order’, it is about dictating, telling the people what to do, it is closer to an authoritarian system than a demagogical one is.
Hip * Demagogy 101 Q1 -You want to be a popular leader in a place like Venezuela with its social and economic history and your base are the underprivileged who hate the elite, do you – (a)claim to be a right wing conservative, fighting for the elite (b)claim to be a socialist, fighting for the people Q2 - To prove you credentials as a ‘socialist’ and the continued support of the groups that keep you in power do you – (a)Nationalise things ‘in the name of the people’ (b)Privatise stuff, handing it over to the elites that are hated by your base. Q3 - To prove you’re the ‘people‘champion do you (a)try to seek consensus with the groups (the elite, the US) that your base see as ‘enemies’ (b)routinely abuse loudly the groups (the elite, the US) that your base see as ‘enemies’
Hip You can also be a demagogue who just claims to be a socialist, especially if ‘socialist’ sounding policies and rhetoric keep you in power. My point is that he acts like a demagogue rather than as a progressive left winger your argument is that he is a socialist and a left winger because you like to think of him as a socialist and a left winger. And I think you are doing that because you’d like to claim all socialists and left wingers are like Chavez. The problem is that so far your criticisms all seem to be directed at Hugo Chavez not left wing ideas. If you have specific criticisms of left wing ideas please present them. *