Just bring along the AR-15. You'll look like everyone else. :biggrin:
Hugo Chavez fisting, not fingering, Bush
- Thread starter rockwool
- Start date
My point is not that he is wrong to impose (and be vocal about) US dominance over the region... my point is that he is a foolish man and he IS going to do or say something to piss someone off that he shouldnt. My guess is that he is going to put the country in harms way somehow, probably by even allying with the wrong people just because they share his anti US view.
like 2 years ago? my views have shifted considerably to the right since i joined the real world, got a job, started dealing with lots of different people and started paying taxes. apostasis was bound to happen :biggrin:
i´ve always considered "if people consider being commies is/was the way to go, let them be". (although am not so sure lately, since that usually turns into an worse form of party aristocracy), and that people have the right not to be forcefed capitalism.
and that not everybody does better when 1st capitalism/social models are introduced. (likely due to cultural conflicts).
i think was pointing out that 1st world capitalism isnt my cup of tea, (i have a big issue with the whole mobility of capital, but inmobility of labor, which is blatant violation of free trade on theory) although i recognize it does a heck of a job pulling people out of misery, even under its constraints.
but i´ve kinda realized the limitations are more due the nature of people rather than a intrinsic failure of the system.
its still the best of the available tested in the real world (i think i thought that too long before 2-3 years ago).
dude, i also had those dreams about roadtripping the americas when i was in high school, that when i finished college, i´d drive back down here.
i did drive an atlantic ocean-pacific ocean- atlantic ocean though.
colombia is dangerous. plus, they´d ferry your car thru 1/3 colombia and panama anyways. nicaragua isnt so bad actually.
peru´s part of the pan-american crosses 1600 miles of dry desert (think sahara). its awesome if you like to surf though. if you ever try a roadtrip, the pan-american might not always be the best route.
the andes is awesome for what you are looking for. lots of nice scenery. the rainforest is also a nice place to visit.
pm rideit and ask him about peru, he´s been here a few times and i´ve met him. he loves the place, he´s been thru a good tour and knows the place around. the guiding makes a lot of difference when travelling to south america.
unlike most americans whose idea of an exotic vacation if eating in crappy places, getting desyntheria and then getting mugged.
if you ever drop by, i´d definately show you around.
What Alexis is talking about sounds like the Marx theory about the
working man also works for the money his boss (owner of the company) makes of him. Am I understanding you correct? (You are sometimes hard to understand. I think it's because of your fundament in Spanish lingo, which is backwards talk like how the devil speaks..)
'You Ohio, are talking about the basic idea/purpose of the capitalist system which is that the money have to grow/multiply.
I disagree from the capitalists because I don't put the growth of the money in first place, I put people in first place. Peoples human rights must be fulfilled before anything else. Today that is set asside for the greed of a few. Distribution of the money is the single most important thing, even if it means that the money don't grow.
Man, I hardly know anything about Peru, but I do know your stance on a lot of stuff and your conclusions have sometimes been far out... A "leftist dictatorship" in the back yard of the US in the middle of the cold war...The chanse of aliens ruling this world is greater.
If you say inflation, I say Argentina. That country was the role model of the WTO and the World Bank in how a liberal capitalist society should be. Poor people... I know from an Argentinian friend whos family had a really nice apartment in a great spot of B.A. and had to sell it to afford some food!
The middle calss getting bigger is in line with Marx's theory that the left over crumbles from the rich will fall down to the next level and so on. Like Marie Antoinette who answered the peoples cry for bread with "why eat bread, let them eat cake" (or something like that). The part of the workingclass that gets the privilige to become middleclass is the part that least needs the help. Help has got to start at the verry bottom and rise from there.
What the hell are you talking about, you're one of the most priviliged midgets in Peru! I don't know anybody who could afford a Porsche, I hardly even know anybody with a drivers license because they cost soo damn much over here... My computer is like from 98 or something which I bought used three years ago..Man I walk a mile to the well every morning just to get water so I can make coffee out of expired date beans that I get for 1/4 of the price...At least you guy can live of the land, pick some fruit from the trees and eat...We on the other side hardly even have polar bears walking on our streets anymore and therefore nothing to eat...North American Indians never saw such a shortage on buffalo....no chit, and to top that, he was telling that to a peruvian in peru.
if money doesnt grow, then there is nothing to "distribute", thus its not the most important thing.
and then, once you "distribute" what people already own, well, people aren´t stupid.
they dont sit down while you "distribute" their money. they run away, close their businesses, fire people and migrate with whatever they can take.
the net result is that the people you are trying to help initially, will be worse off in the not so long run, after the inmediate "improvement" starts slowing down because you run out of things (and people from whom you can take away) to distribute while simulatenously the population grows.
you just cant isolate one variable and hope the others dont move.
about you doubting my defitinions and you doubting there was a "leftist dictatorship in the backyard of the US". dude, the guy was quite the socialist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Velasco
on argentina, there is a lot to be said, its a pretty deep subject.
i believe there were some huge mistakes made by the argentinean government that eventually led to the disaster. among them, the one i´ve read and understand was a cornerstone was the liberalization of the ability to acquire public debt. the tipping point was argentina´s debt that got so big, in part, because the argentinean government allowed local governments to freely acquire public debt and print bonds, which ultimately accelerated the collapse when the debt/income/spending ratio got out of hand, which then turned into finantial fear, capitals fleeing and then snowballed down from there. of course it isnt easy as that, but that´s a notable difference between the argentina experience an others.
Hmm, you could be right, dunno. When it comes to Iran I don't know what he is doing. US inteligence reports are not to be trusted as we've seen clearly in the recent years, but if it is so that Iran is trying to build a nuke with the purpose of dropping it on Israel then he shouldn't affiliate with them. If Iran is trying to build nuklear energy and nukes for self defence, then I find nothing wrong with Chavez having diplomatic relations with them.
What, you had a heart and chose to go the other way for opportunist reasons? We got a problem here! I figured you for nonunderstanding because you seemed to be from a well off family... What you gonna do next, powder your skin and vote conservative? Put down your drink borracho and adjust that native colourful cap of yours because its earflap is covering your one good eye!
Listen man, about parti aristocracy, I know exactly what you're saying here cus I've seen it before. It's the socialist politicians that think that a wellmeaning small group can lead the masses of unknowing "proles" to the better, but fail because power corrupted them too. It is not socialism that is wrong. It is autoritative socialism like that fails due to mankinds weaknesses.
Autonomus socialists want to flatten our pyramid built chain of command societies as much as possible. Direct rule on things by those that are affected by them, not as it is in our societies today with representative ruling by people you don't have a damn thing incommon and most times you álso have representative stages inbetween aswell.
You touched a good thing there, globalism. One liberal/conservative side you have them who calls them selves globalists but only think about toll free trading when they talk about it. On the socialist side you have them who call them selves globalists keep people in their thoughts primarily and want them to be abel to travel freely just as goods should be.
You're not saying capitalism is "does a heck of a job pulling people out of misery" and that it's "still the best of the available tested in the real world" are you? Don't make me bring out the wooden club again...
Nono, we're not lacking money or food or anything in this beautiful world. We have all that but it is consentrated to a minority of our population. People here in Sweden eat meat 3 times per day while others don't even see meat once a week. In Latin America most the land is owned by a small clique but far form all of it is used to grow food even though "their own people" are starving.
Take Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán's Guatemala for example. He did some agrary reforms but because of them he was ousted in a coup d'état organized by CIA and replaced by a junta.
Cut from wikipedia:
"It is estimated that 2% of the country's population controlled 72% of all arable land in 1945, but only 12% of it was being utilized." Of course senor campesino and his family is going to starve if land is undistributed like that.
Yeah, all of them millionares and billionares are going to oppose a distribution of their whealth, but a government can freeze all assets while it is conducting this. If there is will a government wil find the way.
Juan Velasco, very strange that he managed to do so while under the same period, 11 September 1973, in Chile the CIA helped Augusto Pinochet topple the democraticly elected socialist Salvador Allende. As the CIA did in all of Latin America..
Man, I don't know Argentina in detail. I just know it was used as a perfect school boy example by the WTO and World Bank.
you know what churchill said?, well it just hit me 10 years earlier.
and even then turning into a latin american "conservative" still puts me in the ballpark of american democrats, and nowhere near the uk tories yet.
have you even thought that some poor people might be poor for reasons other than exogenous circumstances? (more so in the 1st world).
keep in mind am not saying the opposite neither.
you are talking about freezing the assets of people, and basically stealing from people to "distribute". wtf is up with that?
even if you go from a "means justify the end" perspective, it would make no sense, since that usually ends up in worse conditions for the poor than otherwise. (contradictory?, yes, but the most likely outcome, just check the history of every latin american country from the 50s until the 90s).
and dont be naive and think "education" will solve every problem arising from that. while education is valuable, dont believe everybody wants to be educated and will eventually do what you educate/indoctrinate them for. people just dont work that way.
most people are too lazy, too stupid and too prone to undermine each other for any worldwide communist utopy to work. thus while "good" in theory, fails miserably in execution due to human nature, and the fact the incentive to undermine it (for personal gain) grows proportionally to the number of people abbiding it.
Churchill man, he was a wicked focker, a murdurer. He's done some really bad things to Greek people and to Greece it self. But tell me what he said.
Don't compare you're self to the worse by looking at the tories and the US. Compare your selfe to the better.
A utopia is nessesary to have so to show people of what it should be like here in paradise, because most people seem to not have an idea of how a better society looks like. A communist utopia could take a thousand (a **** load anyways) of years to reach to just because of human nature.
One have to have goals, personaly aswell as a country and the world in a whole.
All people are worth the same. To the dime. Some people are born with handicaps. No politician would say that they are less worth and that they don't deserve all the help they need.
Then we have the total opposite, the smartest of people with an enormous drive and who are enterprising and maybe even artistic.
Inbetween there is a really wide spectra, and towards the bottom you will find people that don't have a visual handicap that aren't close to clever, that aren't happy about living due to what they've been through, aren't enterprising, aren't artistic, just haven't been blessed with anything. These people might come out as lazy just because of circumstanses like this. That lazyness could be life that has deprived them of inner drive and streangth.
No matter what, these people deserve everything so that thay can find their shining path too.
Man, the filty rich have done nothing but stealing for centuries and probably since the days of the egyptians and before that. Thay have ruled over people for millenia. Being stinking rich is not a human right. Having your basic human needs fulfilled is. Why is the land in the ownage of so very few when it can be shared so that every one can have a spot to grow his food for survival? This earth belongs to all of us. How can land be private? Now they want to privatize drinking water.. Isn't that a human right to have some water without paying Evian for it? I need food, a basic human right, I live in this spot with these people, we need to sow this land so we can eat. It is not there for the sole purpose to fill a rich guys ego. After privatization of water will come air, as the last thing to steal for the once with means.
Am I gonna have to purchase my air? Greed never ends, we have to put a stop to it. It is not a human right. It is not a right at all. It is a luxury that we only can alow if we can afford it. Mankind can't afford it.