To paraphrase the great poet T. S. Eliot:

This is the way the democracy ends,
This is the way the democracy ends,
This is the way the democracy ends,
Not with a bang but a whimper.

For those that have not heard, Venezuela today passed legislation, allowing Hugo Chavez to rule by decree.

In other words, the country is now under the complete control of one man.  He is free to ignore (or abolish) the Constitution, throw out term limits, and do anything else he wants.  And he is already whipping up his supporters, with claims that the US is planning an imminant attack on Venezuela.

The US is preparing to attack Venezuela?  Gee, somebody had better tell Congress and the US Military.

And of course, one of his first expected actions is to nationalize all corporate holdings in the country.  That means that anything owned by foreign companies in Venezuela will then become the property of the Government.

What will that mean for the US?  Well, to start with expect oil prices to increase.  A lot.

Chevron and Exxon both have major investments in the Venezuelan oil fields.  Roughly 10% of our oil and gas come from those fields.  Venezuela exports another 3-5% of our oil and gas through their national oil company, Citgo.

That means as much as 15% of our gas could be cut off at Hugo's whim.  Thought gas prices were high last year?  Wait until we loose over 10% of our immediate supply.

And another company expected to take a soaking is AT&T.  In 1999, AT&T took a $50 billion contract to update and renovate Venezuela's crumbling communications infrastructure.  Most of the equipment then in place dated to the 1960's.  Old mechanical switches, and less then half of the country even had telephone access.  Within 3 years, the entire system had been upgraded to the point where it was among the best in South America.  And Hugo says that it rightfully belongs to them.

Long term impact from this?  Well, expect a lot of companies to be much more reluctant in investing overseas.  No more spending billionds of dollars in foreign countries in order to update old or non-existant infrastructure.  What company is going to take that risk, when all it takes is the desire of a dictator to take that all away, resulting in a huge loss.

This is nothing new however.  People before have used fear and promises to "temporarily" take power by popular demand.  A small European country gave absolute power to a failed painter around 70 years ago.  And we all know how that turned out.

And it has also been done in literature.  If anybody in here is a Sci-Fi fan, I urge you to read "Bio Of A Space Tyrant", by Piers Anthony.  That series of 6 books described exactly that happening.  How one man was able to convinve the Legislature to turn all power over to him, resulting in a 10 year long Dictatorship (which was lead by somebody who was insane).  Towards the end, he was even one of the leaders of the resistance movement that overthrew himself.

Hugo's trying to be another Fidel.  ::)  Enough said.

To paraphrase the great poet T. S. Eliot:

This is the way the democracy ends,
This is the way the democracy ends,
This is the way the democracy ends,
Not with a bang but a whimper.

For those that have not heard, Venezuela today passed legislation, allowing Hugo Chavez to rule by decree.

In other words, the country is now under the complete control of one man.  He is free to ignore (or abolish) the Constitution, throw out term limits, and do anything else he wants.  And he is already whipping up his supporters, with claims that the US is planning an imminant attack on Venezuela.




Hmmmm, that sounds a lot like what Dubya has been doing for the past 5 years.



The US is preparing to attack Venezuela?  Gee, somebody had better tell Congress and the US Military.

And of course, one of his first expected actions is to nationalize all corporate holdings in the country.  That means that anything owned by foreign companies in Venezuela will then become the property of the Government.

What will that mean for the US?  Well, to start with expect oil prices to increase.  A lot.

Chevron and Exxon both have major investments in the Venezuelan oil fields.  Roughly 10% of our oil and gas come from those fields.  Venezuela exports another 3-5% of our oil and gas through their national oil company, Citgo.

That means as much as 15% of our gas could be cut off at Hugo's whim.  Thought gas prices were high last year?  Wait until we loose over 10% of our immediate supply.

And another company expected to take a soaking is AT&T.  In 1999, AT&T took a $50 billion contract to update and renovate Venezuela's crumbling communications infrastructure.  Most of the equipment then in place dated to the 1960's.  Old mechanical switches, and less then half of the country even had telephone access.  Within 3 years, the entire system had been upgraded to the point where it was among the best in South America.  And Hugo says that it rightfully belongs to them.

Long term impact from this?  Well, expect a lot of companies to be much more reluctant in investing overseas.  No more spending billionds of dollars in foreign countries in order to update old or non-existant infrastructure.  What company is going to take that risk, when all it takes is the desire of a dictator to take that all away, resulting in a huge loss.

This is nothing new however.  People before have used fear and promises to "temporarily" take power by popular demand.  A small European country gave absolute power to a failed painter around 70 years ago.  And we all know how that turned out.

And it has also been done in literature.  If anybody in here is a Sci-Fi fan, I urge you to read "Bio Of A Space Tyrant", by Piers Anthony.  That series of 6 books described exactly that happening.  How one man was able to convinve the Legislature to turn all power over to him, resulting in a 10 year long Dictatorship (which was lead by somebody who was insane).  Towards the end, he was even one of the leaders of the resistance movement that overthrew himself.



Well, the U.S. got rid of Saddam, why not do the same to Hugo?  ::)  Unfortunately, Dubya got this country in a terrible mess in Iraq and I seriously doubt that anyone is willing to follow him down the same path with Venezula-though I would put it past Dubya to WANT to do it-since, just like Iraq, Venezula has OIL!!!



Cat

The US attack Venezuela?  I highly doubt it.

Long term impact from this?  Well, expect a lot of companies to be much more reluctant in investing overseas.  No more spending billionds of dollars in foreign countries in order to update old or non-existant infrastructure.  What company is going to take that risk, when all it takes is the desire of a dictator to take that all away, resulting in a huge loss.

That sounds like a good thing to me!

If a few huge corporations have to take a soaking, so be it.

Dubya doesn't have the stones to try another oil coup, but this could put a damper on free trade.

Meanwhile, Exxon is claiming the biggest US profit ever, but gas has just gone up twenty cents in two weeks.

No point to that, just wanted to share. ::)

Yup, Chaves the 'savior' of his people is a dictator. This is what happens when you get any extreme leader. I'm being impartial here.. this isn't left bashing. If you go down the route he has you will end up with a dictatorship. Hopefully the U.S can nurse our southern cousins and have the CIA take this guy out quickly.

That sounds like a good thing to me!

If a few huge corporations have to take a soaking, so be it.

Dubya doesn't have the stones to try another oil coup, but this could put a damper on free trade.


I don't see us ever invading Venezuela, unless they start exporting "terror Organizations" and do 9/11 or 7/11 type attacks.  As long as they keep their threats as simple threats, the rest of the world will just sit back and look at Hugo in amusement.

Kinda like they have been doing with Fidel the last 20 years.

"Damper onf free trade" is a gross understatement however.  A lot of the "third world" countries have old and crumbling infrastructures which are in bad need of repair.  Telecommunications, water and power supplies, highways, irrigation, etc.  And since most of these countries do not have the capitol to fix them up themselves, they normally make agreements with larger conglomerates.

A great example of this is India.  When they decided 10 years ago to try and jumpstart their country into the "Information Age", they realized that they did not have some nessicary items, like sattelites.  In the early 1990's, India entered into an agreement with Hughes to build and launch the nessicary sattelites.

Since then, India has become an international powerhouse in providing "Call Center" and other support for a lot of companies.  They are also the leading owner of telecommunication sattelites in SE Asia.  However, they are still not full owners of these sattelites, since they still share ownership (and profits) with Boeing (which bought Hughes in 2000).

And the same thing happened in Eastern Europe after the collapse of the Soviet Union.  Countries from all over Europe flooded in, signing long term service contracts in exchange for replacing ancient infrastructure.  Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, none of them could do the nessicary infrastructure upgrades without the aid of the Soviet Union (which also needed the same updates).  But foreign companies stepped in, and each of them has prospered over the last 15 years.

Long term, this will only hurt "Developing Nations" who want to move into the 21st Century.  They lack the money to do it themselves, and nobody is going to step in and do it for free.  The UN certainly seems unable or unwilling to do it.  That leaves Corporate sponsorship.

And if Hugo does this, I would love to see the the reaction when he needs something from these corporations in the future.  Do you think any company would be willing to invest money in Venezuala, knowing that it might simply be stollen at the whim of a dictator?


Yup, Chaves the 'savior' of his people is a dictator. This is what happens when you get any extreme leader. I'm being impartial here.. this isn't left bashing. If you go down the route he has you will end up with a dictatorship. Hopefully the U.S can nurse our southern cousins and have the CIA take this guy out quickly.


Actually, I hope they just leave him alone.

In fact, things like this make me even more insistant on becomming "self sufficient" for energy.  Make it so we do not have to deal with people like Hugo.

I would rather see Hugo become like FIdel in another 20 years.  An ageing revolutionary who claims to lead a democracy.  Standing on a soapbox, not realizing that most of the world has passed him by, and is laughing behind their backs.

Alive, he becomes a butt of jokes.  Dead, he simply becomes a martyr.  I say let him live.  So he can become another Fidel, Marcos, Kadaffy, or Peron.

Actually, I hope they just leave him alone.

In fact, things like this make me even more insistant on becomming "self sufficient" for energy.  Make it so we do not have to deal with people like Hugo.

I would rather see Hugo become like FIdel in another 20 years.  An ageing revolutionary who claims to lead a democracy.  Standing on a soapbox, not realizing that most of the world has passed him by, and is laughing behind their backs.

Alive, he becomes a butt of jokes.  Dead, he simply becomes a martyr.  I say let him live.  So he can become another Fidel, Marcos, Kadaffy, or Peron.


That's a fair point. I laugh at Fidel on a regular basis.. hell, I laugh at Chavez, he's already a joke.

Meanwhile, Exxon is claiming the biggest US profit ever, but gas has just gone up twenty cents in two weeks.

No point to that, just wanted to share. ::)
No kidding.  I drove by a gas station one day and it was $1.99.  The next day, it was back up to $2.16 :o

i have a ceasar chavez poster on my wall.

"Damper onf free trade" is a gross understatement however.  A lot of the "third world" countries have old and crumbling infrastructures which are in bad need of repair.  Telecommunications, water and power supplies, highways, irrigation, etc.  And since most of these countries do not have the capitol to fix them up themselves, they normally make agreements with larger conglomerates.

I don't think you understood what I meant, M.
What if those same large conglomerates wouldn't help them because of the financial risk?

Free trade is overrated, and I've been against it from the beginning.
It seems that we always lose, doesn't it?

It seems that we always lose, doesn't it?


It depends on what you mean by "we".

My general belief in Geopolitics actually stems from a quote by Abraham Lincoln.  It is actually the basis for most of my beliefs relating to money, capitol, labor, and international relations.

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit
of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor
is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."
Abraham Lincoln, December 3, 1861 - Lincoln's First Annual Message to Congress


Myself, I believe that all relations should be symbiotic.  That means that every party in an agreement has something, and each trades one thing for another.  Be it money for oil, money for metals, or food for machinery.  But because money is fungible, it is the most common tool when conducting trade.

And to take Mr. Lincoln's quote one step further, fruit is also the profit of a tree.  It is the "profit" that allows a tree to make another tree.  Without that profit, the tree simply dies without a future replacement.  Labor can't exist without Business, and Business can't exist without Labor.  Both have to work together in order to ensure that both survive.

In my world view, every nation has to work together to improve the quality of life for all it's citizens.  And in ensuring that each nation is "profitable", it ensures the stability of it's trading partners.  This in turn ensures future stability and prosperity for it's own citizens.

This even goes way back in our own history.  In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, most of Europe was fighting wars to expand it's own "Colonial Empires".  They would send in armies to take over areas of China, Africa, India, Afganistan, and South America.  They only wanted to loot the nations they conquered.  The only infrastructure they put in was the minimal to ensure their control.

At the same time, the "Yankee Traders" were doing business in the same areas.  These were American companies and individuals, who simply wanted to conduct trade.  They had no interest in controlling the nations, or in taking over territory.  They wanted to pick up Rice and Tea from China, which they would take to Japan and trade for silk.  That silk would return to the US where it was traded for gold.  The gold would make it's way to Europe where it bought manufactured goods.

When England took over parts of China and created the colony of Hong Kong, the US had it's own little "Military Expeditions" in the Far East.  Gunboats and Battleships went to Japan and Korea.  They did not come to conquer, but to simply open them up for international trade.  Once trade agreements were made, they left.  One side effect of this was to shock Japan out of isolationism and make them join the rest of the world.  Within 50 years, Japan changed from an Agrarian culture to an industrial powerhouse.

To me, the world would be much better off if all relations were held in a fair manner.  This is my own private "Utopia".  Each country trading fairly with it's neighbor.  And when that neighbor needs help, you give it to them.  It may cost money now, but the future profits will more then make up for it.  Taking advantage of such people will only hurt profitability, because they will no longer trust doing business with you (and other countries will also loose faith in doing business).

So in a "We" context, I view the entire world as "We".  I do not set aside the US, or any company as being "it's own little world".  And if "We" suffers, everybody suffers.

Yup, Chaves the 'savior' of his people is a dictator. This is what happens when you get any extreme leader. I'm being impartial here.. this isn't left bashing. If you go down the route he has you will end up with a dictatorship. Hopefully the U.S can nurse our southern cousins and have the CIA take this guy out quickly.



Like what they did to Salvador Allende? Then we can get another dictator in there like Pinochet.  ::)



Cat

We don't own Venezuela.  We don't own the Venezuelan people.  We don't own the Venezuelan government.  We don't own Venezuela's natural resources.  A conservative is supposed to respect the sovereign state, and not just the sovereign states that favor Western corporate interests.  Chavez and Co. are not going to invade us.  We have no business invading them.  If they tell AT&T, Exxon, and KFC to get out, then those companies have got to GO!  You don't like it?  That's shufftit!

We had a revolution 230 years ago.  The British crown didn't like us swiping his majesty's royal...stuff, and they sure as heck didn't like OUR form of government.  When the Brits invaded in the early 19th century, the Americans didn't just roll over and take it!  And yet we get indignant when countries such as Cuba and Venezuela do the same thing.  Yeah, yeah, I know it's not the same same thing, but it is in principle.

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/znaika.gif


Anyway, if the stupidazz loony Bushies make war on Iran, gas will cost you $6.00 a gallon, but you won't be worrying about the price of gas or Hugo Chavez, you'll be scared sh*tless about a nuclear holocaust...and rightfully so. 

Washington+Jerusalem+theran = BIG TROUBLE!

That's just one way democracy ends...

here's another (edit to add:) or even this sort of thing

I doubt this'll cause the end of democracy as we know it...

One guaranteed democracy-killer is where the political parties all represent single social or religious factions: whenever I hear about a "Sunni" or "Shi'a" party in Iraq, I know what they'll end up with isn't democracy but a legitimization of mob rule.  The same can be said for Northern Ireland.

We don't own Venezuela.  We don't own the Venezuelan people.  We don't own the Venezuelan government.  We don't own Venezuela's natural resources.  A conservative is supposed to respect the sovereign state, and not just the sovereign states that favor Western corporate interests. 

Max, I think you are missing the intent I had of starting this thread.

If Venezuela wants to turn itself over to a dictator, that is their business.  More power to them, and I hope they are happy with what they got.

But at the same time, they will now get whatever they deserve.  Hugo may well become a benevolent dictator, who brings their nation to greatness.  He may also turn it into an evil repressed land, where those who do not agree with him are put to death.  But either way, they have now given up their right to complain about what the future brings.

It was their decision.  Nobody else has a right to agree or dissagree with it.  However, I do believe that people have the right to watch what happens, and comment on how things may go.  Mostly, I ws commenting on how a "Modern Democracy" could willingly turn itself over to a dictator.  Willingly throwing away their Constitution and all of their civil rights.

And it is not the first time this has happened.  Caeser, Napolean, Hitler, Mussolini, Peron, Castro, Tito.  Many countries have willingly turned themselves over to a dictator.  It remains to be seen if Hugo becomes another Marhsal Tito, or an Adolph Hitler.

However, I do believe that people have the right to watch what happens, and comment on how things may go.  Mostly, I ws commenting on how a "Modern Democracy" could willingly turn itself over to a dictator.  Willingly throwing away their Constitution and all of their civil rights.



Hmmm....now that rings a bell!

http://www.bueso.de/rlp/bilder/bush-dumb.jpg


That's just one way democracy ends...

here's another (edit to add:) or even this sort of thing

I doubt this'll cause the end of democracy as we know it...

One guaranteed democracy-killer is where the political parties all represent single social or religious factions: whenever I hear about a "Sunni" or "Shi'a" party in Iraq, I know what they'll end up with isn't democracy but a legitimization of mob rule.  The same can be said for Northern Ireland.


Nice to see you again, Philbo!  And thanks for your contribution.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_thumleft.gif

Hmmm....now that rings a bell!

http://www.bueso.de/rlp/bilder/bush-dumb.jpg




+1 karma



Cat

+1 karma



Cat

Thanks, Cat!



And it is not the first time this has happened.  Caeser, Napolean, Hitler, Mussolini, Peron, Castro, Tito.  Many countries have willingly turned themselves over to a dictator.  It remains to be seen if Hugo becomes another Marhsal Tito, or an Adolph Hitler.

Whistle while you work, Hitler is a jerk, Mussolini bit my weenie now it doesn't work!