Talk:Bolivarian Revolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute. Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles. |
 |
Bolivarian Revolution is part of WikiProject Venezuela, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Venezuela and Venezuela-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
Contents |
[edit] Constitutional Violation
"Subsequently, Pedro Carmona, the head of the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce, the nation's business federation, was proclaimed president, in clear violation of Venezuela's constitution.".
How was it a clear vioation? I think many would interpret the stepping up of Carmona as adhering to article 350, which states:
"El pueblo de Venezuela, fiel a su tradición republicana, a su lucha por la independencia, la paz y la libertad, desconocerá cualquier régimen, legislación o autoridad que contraríe los valores, principios y garantías democráticos o menoscabe los derechos humanos."
"The people of Venezuela, loyal to their republican tradition, to their fight for independence, peace, and liberty, will disavow any regime, legislation or authority that either goes against democratic values, guarantees, and principles or undermines human rights"
For instance, commanding the activation of Plan Avila , ie deploying and setting the army against a several hundred-thousands-strong demonstration of almost totally unarmed opponents, consciously forseeing and encouraging a massacre, is at least my interpretation of abusing human rights (I'm not saying that Carmona did right in enacting all those improvised decrees under his rule either, but can you put those two abuses in the same light?). What about publicly firing numerous PDVSA employees without warning on national TV? That's clearly disregarding democratic guarantees, and is normally seen as a major event that sparked the opposition demonstration.
I'm not mentioning any other of Chavez's abuses of the Constitution for now.
Piotr —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.136.22.4 (talk • contribs).
Great its your POV vs their POV. Way to go! Perhaps it didnt occur to you that a discussion as to the constitutionality or not of any actions is beyond the scope of this discussion? Hence both that comment is POV and your comment is irrelevant. Jeez! --Cerejota 03:16, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Is not so much of a POV, the supreme court of justice once absolved the military actors involved on this episode claiming a "power vacuum" that rose to power to Mr. Carmona. It wasn't a coupe d'etate. The violation to the consitution debate can come when analyzing what happened after he was appointed president of the republic.
- --Anonymous - 2006.07.18 17:31h UTC-4
[edit] Controversy not represented
I think that this article is badly stacked in favor of Chávez. There are many people who like the man and his philosophy, but he also has many detractors. In its current state, I'm not sure that the article serves the needs of readers.
Personally, I agree with Chávez's purported ideology, but also suspect that he is sometimes vain, paranoid, and/or knuckleheaded. He once cut off oil supplies to the Dominican Republic because of his bizarre belief that then-President Hipólito Mejía was involved in an assasination plot.
--Defenestrate 22:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- There is historical precedent for Chávez' claim. Late Dominican dictator Trujillo was well-known for his hatred of — and assassination attempt against — then-Venezuelan president Betancourt. —Sesel 06:49, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- How about moving relevant parts of the Politics section in Venezuela under a Controversy section here? It would be a good place to start and would clean up the Politics section up a bit. Spaceriqui 05:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Venepal
"The example of Venepal has inspired many of Chávez's supporters to call for a completely socialist planned economy. Some within Chávez's political party believe that nationalizing the economy would incur retaliation from the United States, nonetheless the Bolivarian Revolution is quickly developing into a socialist movement." - I'd like to see some sources to back this up. My understanding of the mainstream of the movement is that it is more about a old-style (50s-70s) European social democracy (i.e. control of key companies and sectors) than a "planned economy" in the Soviet sense, which is what is generally implied by that term. Rd232 20:42, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Dear God! Jesus an Activist?
I wish more information on the following found on this article: "Chávez also asserted in his September 2005 speech at the Bronx's Latino Pastoral Action Center that Jesus of Nazareth was a radical activist who purportedly emphasized and sought redistributive social justice and democratic socialism"
-
-
-
- The *exact* remarks are available in the Hugo Chavez article, under the "Personal life" section. There, you will see what he stated for yourself. Also, that quote is cited and footnoted, so you can check up on the source yourself. Regards, Saravask 06:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] archive of "(Lead-up to the Revolution)"
The following material was probably written by a newbie and is under threat of deletion, so i've put it here for archival purposes only. i didn't write it, i'm only quoting it. Clearly it sounds more like an essay than an externally referenced encyclopedia article... Boud 10:49, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
begin quote
===Lead-up to the Revolution===
During the sixties the world as a whole saw a general shift towards redistribution of power and wealth favouring the underprivileged sectors. During the seventies and eighties profits of large corporations fell due to better labour organizations, nationalist policies of Third World countries, increasing taxes, and better state regulation. During the first decades of the Punto Fijo regime, Venezuela enjoyed increasing equality and general improvements in the standard of living. Employment rates increased and better education allowed Venezuelans a great degree of social mobility. They increasingly viewed themselves as a society that was inclusive, racially democratic, and egalitarian. The late seventies saw a decline in these trends. The debt crisis of 1983 hit Venezuelans especially hard because they expected growth and progress, not devaluation of currency and a deterioration in living conditions. It is estimated that in the decade after the debt crisis poverty in Venezuela nearly doubled. The fluid society of the sixties and seventies no longer existed and social segregation increased. The upper and middle class came to see the lower class as an enemy. Such a decline in society led to an increasingly ineffective, corrupt, and unresponsive government. Demonstrations, such as Caracazo, showed Venezuelans' discontent with the governing bodies. This disillusionment led, in 1998, to the election of Hugo Chavez and his Movement for the Fifth Republic political party. (Venezuelan presidential election, 1998)
end quote
[edit] Serious POV, "Advertisement" and lack of citations
I have attempted to work on individual sections, and will not put a POV tag on the entire article, if editors involved in the article can begin to work on referencing some of the statements which have been included in the article. It currently reads like an advertisement for Chavez, and contains a number of POV and unreferenced statements. Sandy 12:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- then wouldn't the proper tag be for citations, not for POV concerns? --MateoP 17:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- by the way, if you think certain parts of the article read as POV, why not simple rewrite them into neutral? --MateoP 17:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't want to get started on re-writing as I have a lot of travel on the horizon, and need to focus when my travel is completed. I found some of the sections needed cleanup, some needed citations, and others were POV. Different sections needed different tags. If you feel I've tagged them incorrectly, please feel free to re-tag in my absence, as I will be traveling for a bit. Sorry ... life never stands still :-) Sandy 18:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm the one who wrote the section on Racism and had my citations but I know I probably did it wrong (yea I'm somewhat new to this) and someone removed it. I'm not too technologically inclined and would appreciate some help doing the citations. --Mouna 2 01:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Challenges to the Women's Movement
This single-paragraph section is very fuzzy and does not cite references. It's connection with the rest of the article is not clear at all.JRSP 16:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ref converter bot
Someone ran a ref converter bot. I've been trying for hours to figure out what's wrong, can't find the problem, don't know how to fix it, but all named refs are getting listed double. I give up. Sandy 00:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- whew, it wasn't the bot, it was a problem with footnotes gone crazy, but I lost several hours messing around with it. Sandy 20:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Racism
I as a Venezuelan find the discussion about racism strange. Racism is definitely a disgrace, but comparatively speaking I find racism in my country is less acute than in any other country I know of or have visited. Almost everywhere else dark skinned people are worse of than white onces, be that in the USA, in Europe, in Asia, even in Africa. Foremost I might need to say: My ancestors were black, Indian and some European, my family definitely looks like the median Venezuelan. If you want to write about racism as an issue, you should do so about every single country in the world. It is true that black people tend to be poorer, but that has less to do with any meaningful racism in the last decades or so, but with the whole heritage: if you have parents with a good education, you tend to be better off. For decades now people in Venezuela could reach any job more easily regardless the colour of their skin than elsewhere. You mention Hugo Chavez is called "ape". So are blond people. Actually "mono titi", a very light-haired monkey (almost yellow), is a slang word for "blond person". The "mono" alone is to say someone is "silly" and not of any given colour, at least in Venezuela.
You are right; they discuss racism as if where US racism, but it's not
I'm backing you here. Racism?...give me a break. Of course dark-skinned people are sometimes used to portray criminals...it is not just meanness from the media, it is a statistic fact. Think about it, lets put our subjective thoughts aside: most robbers come from the lower strata of the social ladder and most of the people in the lower strata are not white. Plus, I've seen plenty of white and "mulato" people playing criminals and maids on Venezuelan shows. The "monkey" argument regarding the President Hugo Chávez is debatable, he is compared to a monkey, not because of the "animal quality" but because of the "behavioural quality". --Espazolano 23:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
