Democratic Socialism In Venezuela

Summary: B.Sanders supported and continues to support "Democratic" Socialism / Statist Authoritarianism (through the popular vote, don't for that, as if magical "voting" for immoral behavior - they very thing the Framers of the US Constitution spoke, at length AGAINST - somehow makes economic sense) as a means of running the economy for the 'Good of Society'.

Well well well, just like all other 'Socialistic' paradises (democratic, progressive, or otherwise) they've run out of food, run out of medicine, run out of other people's money to spend and are stuck with Dear Leader enslaving the general populous - forced labor, just as ALWAYS happens, and the people are eating their gawd-damn pets. That's how hungry they are.


See, at the end of the day, Empiricism trumps. Now, let's see how far Progressive Poster Child Sweden makes it.


Note: Take a good look at where Progressives have the most control over our society:
Education (1 in 5 Government School graduates cannot read and write);
Medicine (ObamaCare is literally imploding while at the same time HYPER Government regulation has made healthcare astronomically expensive while at the exact same time making it the #1 reason you will die, medical error, assuming you don't smoke. Let that sink in: IF you do not smoke, statistically you will be killed off and die of medical error.);
War on Drugs - has led to gang warfare and rampant drug use ZERO reduction in drug use and trillions of dollars wasted (not to mention the Police State and PIC);
Welfare - has led to the destruction of the nuclear family and generational dependency and violence.
Minimum Wage - destroyed the Black community. Ironically, this same trick was used by the White Dutch in S. Africa to prevent Blacks from working in the mining trade - with the exact same results.
Regulations - has led to massive Rent-Seeking and all but destroyed the entrepreneurial spirit in the poor, many of whom (thanks to Government School) can't even read the forms they're required to fill in. If they did, rent-seeking through licencing scams will stop them.
War on Terror - has led to the NSA illegally spying on each and every one of us, while concurrently wasting trillions of dollars on MIC with Terrorism now spreading across the EU; and finally,
The Progressive Central Bank and the Income Tax - originally said to 'tax the rich' is now a base tax used BY the rich to bail themselves out while concurrently used by the State to destroy society.

Givermint - destroying society one Nation State at a time, so you don't have to.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

150 years and counting.

In education, medicine, the war on terror, the war on drugs, minimum wage, and regulations, Progressives do not control or have the dominant influence over US society. In welfare and the existence of a somewhat progressive income tax, some Progressive influence is visible, mostly left over from the New Deal era prior to Reagan.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Two World Wars and counting.

That aside, the Second Industrial Revolution and nearly limitless Earth to pilfer and oil to burn, has made all but the most far left progressive paradises sustainable (See: modern day Venezuela or Swedenstan in 2050). Think of this last century as The Age of Oil. Also to note: Sweden's prosperity was mostly generated during times when free-trade was most liberal. Then they would oscillate over towards socialism, where they spent it fecklessly as well as reasonably; homogeneity, allowing for some alignment with what the free-markets would have done much more efficiently.

Lastly, 150 years may appear to be a long time - it's not. In a blink of an eye, once prosperous European Mediterranean states are now religious shit holes. They're never coming back. There's no turning the train around, halfway through the tunnel.

It's done. Over.

Welcome to America, Sweden.


By distorting the price mechanism, through the illusion of: Free-Shit, Swedes (and Germans) have been seriously misled about where their standard of living is actually derived from, and in the process, have not had the children required to maintain it. Children take a LONG time and cost a lot of money to raise. You're not going to import Germans - it's not possible. One wonders why? Why not have children? Well, why would they The State's there to make sure everything they need in old age is there for them - Magically.


Anyway, in the meantime, the Venezuelan Progressive "Democratic" Socialist paradise has reached the end of the Socialist line. Their only option now is a return to free-markets.

Likewise, the only peaceful option Sweden and Germany have left now, is a total elimination of the Welfare State and return to free-market capitalism. Total elimination of the Welfare State.

Not likely to happen. And soon, it will be democratically/demographically, impossible. And won't that be nice iceaura? No more need to worry about free-markets and liberal society / Western Culture.

Luckily enough, the East is doing very well.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yeah, it is. And it's not over yet - still counting.

They've been prosperous before, and religious shitholes before.

After twenty years or so, most of it under duress and while being actively undermined by America? And you said 150 years was a short time.

Return? They were religious shitholes before, and colonies before: When was this "free market" stuff supposed to have happened?

Their economies have been market capitalist for more than a century, before that they were mercantile monarchies - what are they to "return" to? Monarchy? Mercantilism?

 

What? World Wars?

You're going to argue America has actively 'undermined' the Venezuelan economy? What are you on about? We actually support their economy by refining their oil for them. We also buy their oil. Socialism destroyed their economy. Hugo Boss, a true believer, elected three times through the democratic process - and beloved by most citizens, himself was (supposed) dumbstruck when he discovered, actually, in the real world, they were running out of goods and services. Get this, there is no 'free'. And when you distort the price mechanism, by stealing, you end up with less. Not more. Less. Sure, sitting atop a bunch of oil helps, for a time.

I have to say, you sound like you've been listening to Alex Jones or the equivalent with that one. There's no need for conspiracy theories about the USA, the fact is Socialism / stealing resulted in a distorted price mechanism that did not align well with the real-world / objective truth - finally collapsing the Venezuelan economy. Socialism / Authoritarian Statism, never aligns perfectly with the will of the people - that would a free-market. The whole point in using State violence is to violate the rights of morally innocent people.

My guess is, Venezuelans believed a lot of bullshit, and they elected someone like-minded. The real world caught up. Sweden OTOH, they've been convinced to believe a lot of bullshit - my guess is, they'll realize this was a mistake, but it'll be too late. Well, to save the Welfare State anyway.

 

Of course. For a century or more. You didn't know that?

The economy, or "resource curse"
http://countrystudies.us/venezuela/22.htm
http://www.ugr.es/~teoriahe/RePEc/gra/wpaper/thepapers08_18.pdf

undermining, briefly:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35766.htm
http://www.globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/USVZrelations1.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_crisis_of_1895
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States–Venezuela_relations

 

According to your link:

Bilateral Economic Relations

The United States is Venezuela's largest trading partner. Bilateral trade in goods between both countries reached $41.4 billion in 2014. U.S. goods exports to Venezuela totaled $11.1 billion, while imports from Venezuela totaled $30.2 billion. U.S. exports to Venezuela include oil machinery, organic chemicals, agricultural products, optical and medical instruments, autos and auto parts. Crude oil dominates U.S. imports from Venezuela, which is one of the top five suppliers of foreign oil to the United States. About 500 U.S. companies are represented in Venezuela. U.S. foreign direct investment in Venezuela is concentrated largely in the petroleum and manufacturing sectors.


--o--
While Progressive "Democratic" Socialism may be one of these worse forms of price distortion (see: Any US Government-run Welfare ghetto, Milwaukee WI comes to mind) often culminating in dictatorships and/or world wars and/or economic collapse. Yes, I agree, the price-mechanism may also be distorted (in a way) by abundant guano fertilizer, abundant oil, or even a wealthy parent (or society). At the Nation State level, abundant 'natural' resources allows for abundance of monetary units (mainly USD) and these will in turn agitate the 'Free-Shit' Army (see: K-14) who need to use these 'free' monetary units to further distort the price mechanism by giving away: 'Free-Shit". The thing is, shit's not free. Thus, when prices finally fail to represent objective reality, the economy / society is ruined (See: Venezuela, and soon to be Sweden and Germany).


And here's the hitch.....

What's a demagogue to do in a democratic / republic iceaura? In Progressive "Democratic" Socialistic paradises - you only get elected through sophistry. Take from the "rich" evil Koch's (stealing all their wealth) and give to the poor little 'protester' (having all their wealth stolen from).

Simple narratives for simple people. All multiculturalism to the Progressive's bag of dirty tricks - well, you can imagine.....


Protester/Government School Graduate: “It’s sad, because you know, this what happened because they not helping the black community, like you know, the rich people, they got all this money, and they, like not trying to give us none.”

Government schools, getting one thing right.

Do you know who you will not find down there supporting the 'Protesters"? B.Sanders. No, no no way in hell. Not only would Sanders be beaten to a bloody pulp for being white, but, you see, Bernie Bean's work is done here. He has 'endorsed' Hillary for POTUS and so now it's time to head back to White Bread country and "get to work" selling the narrative Black Lives Matter, White Devils are the problem (in this story Asians also do White-Face) ... and "The Koch's" are ruining this country. Yeah, the Koch's. Not the Progressives. The evil Koch's, you know, by providing value for money goods and services in a manner that is profitable, *GASP* and sustainable. Yes, profit is evil. Thus, it's "The Koch's" fault. So elect B.Sanders, he's gonna give ya-all the 'Free-Shit' you could dream of and deserve: like K-14, 15 for 15, and ObamaCare.


The truth is, Progressive "Democratic" Socialism destroyed Venezuela just as it destroyed our banking system, the Black Community, our medical system, our educational system and is rotting our society from the inside out. Just as it is destroying Europe - again. Gee, if we're lucky we might even end up in WWIII with Russia.

 

Why yes, the US and Venezuela have longstanding economic relations. Especially, the US has invested in the oil industry in Venezuela. Many people point to that as the motive for the US undermining the Venezuelan economy - as with direct colonial oversight, the US corporations got better deals that way.

So on your planet the problem with guys like the Koch brothers is that they make a profit. And what on this one would be wingnut video hate jobbing is information about simple statements for simple people, who are only nonwhite by coincidence.

Nice place. Kind of cartoonish, but clearly easier to handle than the one we live on.

As we can see, without history or meaningful vocabulary, thinking becomes difficult and communication nearly impossible - one produces incoherent fantasies, as in a sensory deprivation tank.

 

LOL

Via: The Progressive (Progressive.org)
Hugo Chávez Interview
August 20, 2006
-- Greg Palast

You’d think George Bush would get down on his knees and kiss Hugo Chávez’s behind. Not only has Chávez delivered cheap oil to the Bronx and other poor communities in the United States. And not only did he offer to bring aid to the victims of Katrina. In my interview with the president of Venezuela on March 28, he made Bush the following astonishing offer: Chávez would drop the price of oil to $50 a barrel, “not too high, a fair price,” he said—a third less than the $75 a barrel for oil recently posted on the spot market. That would bring down the price at the pump by about a buck, from $3 to $2 a gallon. But our President has basically told Chávez to take his cheaper oil and stick it up his pipeline.

Politically, Venezuela is torn in two. Chávez’s “Bolivarian Revolution,” a close replica of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal—a progressive income tax, public works, social security, cheap electricity—makes him wildly popular with the poor. And most Venezuelans are poor. His critics, a four-centuries’ old white elite, unused to sharing oil wealth, portray him as a Castro-hugging anti-Christ.


--oOo--
One of us needs to learn from History, that much is for sure. Cheap oil / a distorted price mechanism, didn't help the poor in either the USA or Venezuela. When energy is cheap, people think it's abundant - and they waste it. Not that you "Progressive" Socialists would care - you created the greatest price distortion mechanism in history: our Central Bank.

Regardless, the nice thing about Empiricism is, objective reality is, what it is. In the real world, thanks to Progressive Socialism, Venezuelan children, mothers and fathers - are starving to death. To the point of eating their own pets. The 'Democratically' elected Progressive Socialist who runs Venezuela has now, has proposed human slavery as a means of feeding the population of Venezuela. This happens in all of your social paradises - eventually.

Those are the historic facts.

Here's some other facts:
The US Government is the largest polluter in human history: FACT
US Government Schools shit out functional illiterates at a rate of 1 in 5: FACT
US Government-run Welfare Ghettos are some of the most dangerous places to live, on Earth: FACT
The US Government runs the largest prison industrial complex in human history: FACT
And etc...


Here's some History:
Via The Independent
Hugo Chavez was a democrat, not a dictator, and showed a progressive alternative to neo-liberalism is both possible and popular.
The President's death will be mourned by millions of Venezuelans - and rightly so
Wednesday 6 March 2013
--Owen Jones

Via The Independent
Hugo Chavez proves you can lead a progressive, popular government that says no to neo-liberalism
Is all the Western media coverage that portrays him as a dictator by chance related to his politics? Here in Venezuela, the truth is very clear to see
Tuesday 9 October 2012
-- Owen Jones

Via Salon: Hugo Chavez’s economic miracle
The Venezuelan leader was often marginalized as a radical. But his brand of socialism achieved real economic gains
Wednesday, 6 March 2013
-- David Sirota



--oOo--

It's pretty clear to see, you Statist Authoritarians (Progressive Socialists, Progressive Fascist, Conservative religious twats, etc....) only stop, when society has finally collapsed. It's only after women and children are literally starving to death, only then do you Statists finally begin to turn in on and eat yourselves. Only then, do you stop.

Until such a time: I say vote for Bernie Bean.
- Free K-14, just like K-12, only you get to waste two more years; oh, and Free O-blah-blah Care, just like our current Government-hyper-regulated DiseaseCare, only it's FREEEEEE... and etc... like our 15 for 15, a 'liveable' wage. As if Bernie "The Bullshit Con Artist" Sanders has ever, in his entire life, created anything other than hotair. Where are the business he or his wife have run? Oh, that's right, they're both very well paid Government "Servants" of "The People".


Don't worry, a few more election cycles, and odds are, we'll get all the "Progressive Socialism" you could have ever wished for, and then some. All we have to do is wait. Dear Leader and WWIII is just around the corner.

 

That's not true.

No, they aren't. They're ignorant opinions about stuff you can't even describe accurately.

First, you have to learn some history. Good luck.

 

How you choose to label historical events will not have any affect on the Venezuelan children starving to death.

Socialism, democratic, autocratic, progressive, regressive, reactionary, or whatever other little label you like to slap on it, is not going to change what it is: another form of State Authoritarianism. Most people will agree, we need to procreate, as a species, to maintain our society. Voting to make rape legal, may make it legal, it doesn't make it love. Socialism derives it's authority, not through voluntary engagement - but through State violence and coercion. It is, therefor, immoral. Demarcating a bit of dirt off and calling it a Nation State and calling the people trapped therein 'Citizens' and even allowing them to 'vote' does not change this fact.

Venezuela is reaching the end conclusion of Socialism: starvation and outright human Slavery. This is a fact. You can stick your fingers in your ears all day long. In the real world real children are really starving and the 'Givermint' has just announced they will begin forced labor. You know "for the Good of Society". See? In our Central Bank run system, our Government just sells T-Bonds, bonded labor is so so soooo much more Civilized. They'll pay their labor tax with 3 months of their lives out on a farm, while we will pay about 25% of our income. Really not much different.

 

But it is going to change how - or even whether - we can talk about it, even think about it.
You keep talking about socialism as if it were necessarily State authoritarianism, for example. That will prevent you from being able to think about it.

Like this:

Socialism does not necessarily involve the State at all. My local fire department is owned by my town, for example. Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ejido

Or the inevitable consequence of the resource curse and centrally planned economies.

 

Okay, are people forced to pay for the local fire department? If so, by whom? I mean, what happens if someone doesn't want to pay and refuses to pay?

I have a nice phone here in my hand. No one forced me to pay for it. I paid for it voluntarily. If I didn't, no one would do a thing. Yet, here we have, somehow - through voluntarism, super-computers that not only fit in our pockets, but people toss them in the trash for a newer version that, really only looks a little more stylish.

 

The resource 'curse' sounds a bit superstitious. As for centrally planned economies - yes, which is why we need to end central planning here in the USA, beginning with our central bank.

 

From, The Federalist: Why So Many Millennials Are Socialists.

Well, looks the reason is fairly simple (Government School, getting one thing right):

Millennials Simply Don’t Know What Socialism Is

First, millennials don’t seem to know what socialism is, and how it’s different from other styles of government. The definition of socialism is government (public) ownership of the means of production—in other words, true socialism requires that government (public) run the businesses. However, a CBS/New York Times survey found that only 16 percent of millennials could accurately define socialism, while 30 percent of Americans over 30 could. (Incidentally, 56 percent of Tea Partiers accurately defined it. In fact, those most concerned about socialism are those best able to explain it.)

With so few able to define socialism, perhaps less surprisingly a Reason-Rupe national survey found college-aged millennials were about as likely to have a favorable view of socialism (58 percent) as they were about capitalism (56 percent). While attitudes toward capitalism remain fairly constant across age groups, support for socialism drops off significantly when moving to older age cohorts. Only about a quarter of Americans older than 55 have a favorable view of socialism.

 

You don't, either.

That's not the definition you use. You even refer to Obamacare as "socialist" - I've seen you do it right here.

Socialism is not a style, btw. It's a category of ideological feature, which can be shared by otherwise quite different ideologies, but is important enough to be used for classification.

Millenials - and many older folk - don't know what capitalism is either. A lot people get it confused with free market competition, for example, or think it describes a particular kind of government (such as democracy).

 

Why is anyone talking about Socialism. No one is trying to be like China, Cuba, and Venezuela. Our comparison should be with Norway, Denmark, Germany, Sweden.

That isn't Socialism. You can call it Democratic Socialism but it's not really socialism. It's just higher taxes than we have and more services and being able to pay for the services that they are currently using.

You can have open borders or you can have state supported services for everyone but you can't have both with no strings attached. Most of what is under discussion is just a matter of degree. Are medical services a single payer state system or the jumbled mess that we have? We pay more and get less than just about any other industrialized country is this regard.

We jail many times (percentage wise) more of our citizens than any other country. Our war on drugs is ineffective. Our being perpetually at war is ineffective. Our lack of campaign reform due to the first amendment issues is a problem.

Very few of our problems are socialism vs capitalism in nature. Venezuela and Cuba have nothing to do with any of these issues.

We should stop pretending the problem is an ideological one such as Democrat vs Republican or Socialism vs Capitalism. The problems here all stem from inaction, continuing with the status quo, corruption of "big money" in politics where representatives do "represent" they just don't represent the public because all of the money needed to run comes from "big money".

These problems could be solved in a bipartisan way because they are problems for everyone. Our system is broken but it's not because of Capitalism vs Socialism.

Take the big money out and educate the public and have a little cooperation and things would be much better. We are becoming like the worst of the third world banana republics because we are starting to act like their politicians who are loud, overly emotional, can't get along and who are corrupt.

 

They feature government owned central banks, government owned schools, government owned fire departments and transportation systems and sewer systems and even hospitals, military stuff, ports and hydropower facilities and oil production corporations.

Those are all socialist features. The more of them the country has, the more socialist it is. Note that the level of government involved is not the critical matter - fire departments are often owned by local governments. At what level one wants to call the country as a whole "Socialist" is partly a choice made relative to a given argument.

My own private criterion, for calling a country as a whole "Socialist", is community ("social") ownership of the agricultural land and housing stock in an industrial economy. Food, clothing, and shelter. I think that's a key and central political matter. But one could make a case for social ownership of the major means of production otherwise, even with private land ownership dominating.

The key broken component of our system is the Republican Party. It was broken by a cabal of capitalists - men who had made fortunes by investing capital, but were yet ambitious and dissatisfied with their prospects, so they set out to alter the US political system to allow them to make greater fortunes.

In particular, they set out to roll back the New Deal reforms and institutions as emplaced under Franklin Roosevelt. To accomplish this they acquired political influence, in particular effective agenda control of a major Party - they chose, or were chosen by, the Republican Party, for various reasons starting with its being the easiest to manipulate.

Or as the guy put it: Thurston Howell III decided to buddy up with the bigots and fundies and heirs of the Confederacy, and convert the Party of Lincoln to the Party of Jefferson Davis. And succeeded.

 

It's not just the Republicans. Everyone is spending more than they are taking in so it does no good to call some European country socialist for providing certain basic services when we are trying to do some things that are similar but we just aren't doing it effectively and we just aren't paying for it (by just adding to the national debt).

Some people consider Roosevelt's New Deal to be Socialism. The Republicans do seem to have buddied up the rich with the bigots and the bigots come out on the short end of the stick without realizing it.

 

It kind of is. There's no equivalent level of dysfunction anywhere else, and most of the troubles facing others are of Republican making.

It's not because it's Republican, mind. It's just that the Republican Party was the one chosen, partly by luck of circumstance, to be the tool of the anti-New Deal forces.

It had, and has, several socialist features - such as Social Security, a government owned and financed and managed defined benefit pension program.

But other features are not Socialist: a progressive income tax, for example, is not inherently socialist - it can and partly does function as a regulator or governor of market capitalism, and would be a good idea in a purely capitalist economy.