IntenseDebate

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - Subverting Chavismo\'s... · 0 replies · +1 points

Omar makes a good point here. It is impossible to discuss with Chavez when he has all the power. I swats everyone aside (like that hapless Fox News reporter).

However, when the opposition becomes a serious force then Chavez may change. He has changed before and may again if cornered (remember the guy is a shrewd political animal). How to become a serious force? Win over heats and minds. Engage moderate Chavistas (or anyone willing to debate issues and ideas). Maneuver into a position where the opposition can win elections.

...if Chavez then refuses to talk (or worse) we can talk about other options.

Juan makes a good point with regard to Chile. Ultimately polarization ends by engaging the other side and having an open dialogue (consider Northern Ireland or South Africa). Ultimately it is hard to govern if half the country hates the other half.

It is easy to feel that Chavez is an evil SOB, but Chavez can't be ignored. Even out of power he is likely to be a force. He found a raw nerve with the poor and ran with it with great success. Even after 11 years the guy is popular. However, as he got more power he grew increasingly arrogant, eccentric, intolerant and radical. So why not engage as much as we can with disillusioned Chavistas.

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - Dictatorship means nev... · 0 replies · +1 points

I hear you.

...however, as Chavez drifts more and more away from liberal democracy and bungles the economy some reasonable Chavez sympathizers flip.

http://www.haloscan.com/comments/oilwars/1748297748721584035/#632112

(comment on 12.03 at 9:42pm if the link does not work)

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - The three-legged stool · 1 reply · +1 points

I should have been more clear.

I mean to say if Zelaya was a dictator (and everything else was the same) would the Honduras chain of events be justified. In other words, what if Zelaya was exactly like Chavez.

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - Dictatorship means nev... · 0 replies · +1 points

I agree with this.

It is hard to engage as Chavistas tend to swipe - and swipe nastily. Just like HCF himself.

However, the goal much be to engage the reasonable ones and the waverers and win them over. As the economy collapses and disillusionment spreads there should be more of these folks around.

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - The three-legged stool · 0 replies · +1 points

Yeah, I remember reading the views on Honduras and I agree with the substance of posts on CC in this regard.

However, are you suggesting that if Zelaya was a dictator and could not be impeached then the Honduras chain of events would be justified. Basically, would you support something similar in Venezuela right now?

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - Dictatorship means nev... · 2 replies · +2 points

Fair enough. It is not going to be possible to have a fair exchange of ideas with someone who believes religiously in HCF, just like it is probably impossible to debate Chavez or any in his inner circle. That is like trying to discuss the existance of God with a religious fanatic. Its futile.

However, it is possible to debate with people who sympathize with Chavismo or with some facets of Chavismo as long as they engage in ways you describe in your post.

Sympathizing with Chavismo (or seeing him as the lesser evil) does not mean you embody Chavismo or support everything it stands for.

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - Dictatorship means nev... · 4 replies · +2 points

I'm with Greg and Juan on this one. You seem to be running in the face of your post here. It is important to engage people on the other side who are willing to engage and discuss the issues.

...in fact, often Chavistas of all shades tend to get hounded off this site whether they are reasonable or not.

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - Dictatorship means nev... · 0 replies · +1 points

I disagree. Chavistas are over half the country. There is no reason not to engage with Chavistas who are willing to engage in honest debate on the issues. After all one day at least some of them have to be won over to take the country back.

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - The three-legged stool · 6 replies · +2 points

1. Popular support
2. Oil money
3. The military

Nice post!

I agree no one really controls 2. However, I think 1 can still be had even if Chavez still has 2. 2007 proves that.

That being said, 3 is very hard to get. How to you get 3 except by plotting and conspiring?

Therefore since 2 and 3 are unattainable we have to focus on 1. And as far as I can tell it will be harder to get 1 if the opposition plots and conspires. Why? Chavez can easily paint the opposition as golpistas, fascists, anti-democratic elites etc. He can bring up 11A. So the opposition should give up on 3.

The best bet of getting 3 might be to get 1 so clearly that the military simply does not want to suppress 1. So we should be all about getting 1 instead of talking about subversion.

That being said, as I asked before, would people here sympathize with a Zelaya event in Venezuela? Honduras would not have ended like it did if they did not have 1 and 3. I believe the Honduran opposition bungled the coup and could have gotten their ends with other means, but they didn't take any chances. Did the means justify the end?

16 years ago @ Caracas Chronicles - Rules for Subversives · 0 replies · +1 points

well said. I second this.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with Tor

People I'm following

Tor