Chavez defends decree power as democratic, says Bush represents U.S. tyranny
Populism, fascism, nationalism, and socialism all rolled up in one. What if the biggest threat over the next fifty years comes from an old-school fascist like Chavez? He is closer. He has an army. He has a message that appeals to the masses. He can speak to a region undergoing rapid modernization.
8 comments:
Chavy says things that are so ridiculous that even people who want to believe cannot. He is a clown. Dr. Evil would draw a far more respectable following. On the evil genius scale, this guy is a zero.
I hope you are right. Even clowns can be dangerous.
Point taken. Of the other clowns I could think of, I beleive that a long-existing and widely accepted hatred served as the basis of their popularity. But then I realized that I'm no expert on South or Central America, and that a long-standing hatred of the U.S. probably does exist there to some extent.
But is he a fascist? I thought Big Tent had fairly clear standards on these matters. And I thought the clearest among them was not imposing a label that people do not themselves use. Like The James Taylor, I am no expert on Latin America -- far from it -- and like Steve, I know that those who appear to be clowns can be dangerous people. But I'm just not certain that the appellation of "fascist" is especially useful or proper here. I'm willing to be convinced, but Big Tent has set a very high bar for these things, rightfully so, I believe.
dcat
I really am that worried. Seriously. He has a message, an army, a country, money, and a vision that might appeal across a region. I don't use the "f" word lightly (not that one anyway).
Steve --
Oh, I know you don't. And I would imagine that the fact that I am not as worried about him as you is more of a perception issue than anything else. And so I can see where the F word would make sense for you to use both descriptively and as a sort of warning for the gravity of the threat. It might be because I'm about half-Africanist so Chavez just reminds me of a lot of leaders I think about regularly and whom i would not categorize as fascist. What I see in Chavez is a manifestation of the Big Man, Mugabe with (for the time being) more legitimacy in terms of his popular support. Incredibly dangerous, at least potentially, though for my tastes I'll still avoid the f-word in question.
dcat
I would really love to be wrong about this.
Venenzuala has been here before--elite-dominated governments spouting "socialist" inspired rhetoric and using oil revenues to buy off the masses. In fact, this is THE time-honored political tradition in LA.
And the anti-US rhetoric? We have been here before as well. Remember, as VP Nixon was attacked by rioters in Caracas and his car was sprayed with spit and it came close to getting very very ugly (Nixon strung up).
Chavez has designs on replacing Cuba & Castro but I don't think he is anymore dangerous than we make him out to be. Unlike Cuba, V is dependent upon the US oil market. A fascist? I am not sure--I would call him a Peronist--which is a softer and cuddlier LA variety of "fascism" but the state cannot afford to buy off the masses forever--eventually the oil market will collapse and so will the large welfare state and with it--Chavez's regime. This happened a generation(s) ago in V and in Argentina, And in Mexico, And in......you get my point.
Post a Comment