If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   Embalming fluid rejects Chavez   (worldnews.nbcnews.com) divider line 144
    More: Followup, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela, embalming fluid, Maduro, Chinese leaders, world leaders, soviet leader, Communist Party of China  
•       •       •

20563 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Mar 2013 at 11:24 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



144 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-03-14 10:35:21 AM
CARACAS CARCASS - Venezuela's government said on Wednesday it may not be possible to embalm the remains of late leader Hugo Chavez as planned because the process should have been started earlier.

FTFY NBC

/Maybe they could spray some Hugo Boss on Hugo Chavez and get rid of the stink
 
2013-03-14 10:38:31 AM
Damn... he must be getting pretty ripe by now
 
2013-03-14 10:40:26 AM
Even in death, the corruption cannot be stopped. We have only one option left!

fc04.deviantart.net

/Burn the heretic. Kill the mutant. Purge the unclean.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-14 10:42:22 AM
If he's gone off, they should just put him in a jar of formaldehyde.  Or maybe they could just stuff him like a bear or something.
 
2013-03-14 10:47:09 AM
First cancer, now embalming fluid. Next up: Hugo Chavez becomes one of the walking undead, after Hell rejects him.
 
2013-03-14 10:54:12 AM
Cut his head off and graft it onto the Vice President's shoulder.
 
2013-03-14 11:31:01 AM
gs1.wac.edgecastcdn.net
 
2013-03-14 11:31:24 AM
So... wait... communist governments have trouble planning ahead?
 
2013-03-14 11:31:51 AM
Plasticise him
 
2013-03-14 11:32:54 AM
 
2013-03-14 11:33:17 AM

FullMetalPanda: Cut his head off and graft it onto the Vice President's shoulder.


That would sure liven up biden's speeches.
 
2013-03-14 11:33:24 AM
They  should encase him in Lucite.
 
2013-03-14 11:34:49 AM
What about the reports that the stiff that was presented in the funeral was not Chavez' body but only a wax dummy, because Chavez actually died a month ago and their people had to keep that a secret for his VP to take over?  It has been reported that the wax dummy incident was the reason why Brazil's president Dilma Rousseff and Argentina's PM Christina Kirchner suddenly decided to skip the funeral event and unexpectedly bailed out without providing much of an explanation.
 
2013-03-14 11:36:39 AM
floating around reddit today:

img823.imageshack.us
 
2013-03-14 11:37:05 AM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: Plasticise him


If Plastic Man and Aquaman got in a fight, would anyone care?

/"I keep food fresh! I am light and flexible!" Worst superpower ever.
 
2013-03-14 11:37:44 AM
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/Bentham-Project/who/autoicon">http://www.ucl.ac. uk/Bentham-Project/who/autoicon
 
2013-03-14 11:37:45 AM
Big surprise--a backwards near-third-world nation screwed up their delusional plans of grandeur.

Like they couldn't have called that creepy plastination German dude a little earlier?


birdhouse.org
 
2013-03-14 11:38:14 AM
Ha-ha
 
2013-03-14 11:41:49 AM
Where Hugo, I go.
 
2013-03-14 11:43:52 AM

WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]


Yes, but Reddit is a hive of malcontents, social misfits, and sexual misanthropists.

The only difference of them and us, is that most of us are drunk.
 
2013-03-14 11:45:17 AM

hardinparamedic: Even in death, the corruption cannot be stopped. We have only one option left!

[fc04.deviantart.net image 600x375]

/Burn the heretic. Kill the mutant. Purge the unclean.


Radical.
 
2013-03-14 11:45:38 AM

CygnusDarius: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

Yes, but Reddit is a hive of malcontents, social misfits, and sexual misanthropists.

The only difference of them and us, is that most of us are drunk.


Pffft.  The subreddits for beer and homebrewing are drunkier.
 
2013-03-14 11:47:21 AM

Snarfangel: MyKingdomForYourHorse: Plasticise him

If Plastic Man and Aquaman got in a fight, would anyone care?

/"I keep food fresh! I am light and flexible!" Worst superpower ever.

upload.wikimedia.org

actually both aquaman and plastic man are pretty badass in the flashpoint series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashpoint_%28comics%29

Also Aquaman is one of the best of the DC new 52 comics both in art style and story
 
2013-03-14 11:47:54 AM

maggoo: What about the reports that the stiff that was presented in the funeral was not Chavez' body but only a wax dummy, because Chavez actually died a month ago and their people had to keep that a secret for his VP to take over?  It has been reported that the wax dummy incident was the reason why Brazil's president Dilma Rousseff and Argentina's PM Christina Kirchner suddenly decided to skip the funeral event and unexpectedly bailed out without providing much of an explanation.


They've set elections for April, so I guess what would be the point of that?
 
2013-03-14 11:50:04 AM

WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:


Yeah, remember that time Chavez killed half a million people to show up his dad too. What a bastard.
 
2013-03-14 11:50:23 AM
To begin with you need more bald priests.

www.bible-history.com
 
2013-03-14 11:50:46 AM

WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]


White-girl dreads. Wonder what she would do if the Psychlos were invading Earth...
 
2013-03-14 11:57:24 AM

Ukab the Great: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

White-girl dreads. Wonder what she would do if the Psychlos were invading Earth...


Laugh at their platform shoes is what I would do.
 
2013-03-14 11:58:05 AM
Wrap him banana leaves, smoke him over a fire and eat him.  Tasty Chavez!
 
2013-03-14 11:58:31 AM

Ukab the Great: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

White-girl dreads. Wonder what she would do if the Psychlos were invading Earth...


"Champions the impending doom of the foul, foul man-animals."

[image]

"Doesn't realize the Psychlos use it as a gender-neutral term."
 
2013-03-14 11:58:55 AM
I was a little surprised that U.S. republicans didn't try this with Reagan.
 
2013-03-14 12:01:08 PM

ChrisDe: I was a little surprised that U.S. republicans didn't try this with Reagan.


Reagan is right next to Teddy Ballgame, on ice until they find a cure for Alzheimer's.
 
2013-03-14 12:01:11 PM
s10.postimage.org
 
2013-03-14 12:02:00 PM

Ned Stark: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

Yeah, remember that time Chavez killed half a million people to show up his dad too. What a bastard.


What's funny is there are people who really believe that is why the US invaded Iraq.
 
2013-03-14 12:04:49 PM
Big_Fat_Liar:

What's funny is there are people who really believe that is why the US invaded Iraq.

Why did the US invade Iraq?
 
2013-03-14 12:05:54 PM
ChrisDe

"I was a little surprised that U.S. republicans didn't try this with Reagan."

Why? It's always been a big thing for the left, not the right.
 
2013-03-14 12:05:56 PM
See, it's the same problem he's wrestled with for years: he's just too well-loved.

Especially among the anaerobe community.
 
2013-03-14 12:08:11 PM

The Irresponsible Captain: To begin with you need more bald priests.


That guy on the left is taking a pic with his iPhone. He won't be employed as a mortician for long.
 
2013-03-14 12:11:58 PM
Doesn't embalmed Lenin require constant touchup? It doesn't seem worth the effort. Just build a statue.
 
2013-03-14 12:13:23 PM
content6.flixster.com
Woodrow, you should have packed him in salt before taking off for Texas to bury him in that little orchard he and Claire loved so much.

*sniff*.....
 
2013-03-14 12:15:06 PM
theinfosphere.org
Maybe just the tip
 
2013-03-14 12:15:11 PM

WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]


I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.
 
2013-03-14 12:15:13 PM

Sudlow: ChrisDe

"I was a little surprised that U.S. republicans didn't try this with Reagan."

Why? It's always been a big thing for the left, not the right.


It is widely known that King Tut was Centrist.
 
2013-03-14 12:17:20 PM
speaking of dead dictators, what ever happened to the Yasser Arafat re-autopsy?

since they didn't find some bombshell to blame on the Jews, evidently, what happened?

/ probably too expensive to mummify Chavez, or the foreigners wanted hard currency
 
2013-03-14 12:23:51 PM
Embalming wasn't part of the plan.
farm4.static.flickr.com
 
2013-03-14 12:24:58 PM

Sudlow: ChrisDe

"I was a little surprised that U.S. republicans didn't try this with Reagan."

Why? It's always been a big thing for the left, not the right.


you'd be asking them to release cash and cash trumps sentiment, education, environmental concerns, the elderly, the sick, the unemployed, scientific advancement, the at risk children, and on and on ad infinitum.
 
2013-03-14 12:35:02 PM
Yeah, I totally read Caracas as Carcass the first time too.  Cracked me up!
 
2013-03-14 12:38:00 PM

tylerdurden217: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.

macsmind.com
 
2013-03-14 12:42:37 PM
The government had said it planned to embalm Chavez's remains "for eternity" in much the same way as was done with the remains of Soviet leaders Lenin and Stalin and communist Chinese leader Mao Zedong after they died.

Communists are friggin' weird.
 
2013-03-14 12:45:10 PM
At first I thought the headline said something about Emilio Esteves
 
2013-03-14 12:48:31 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: [content6.flixster.com image 320x240]
Woodrow, you should have packed him in salt before taking off for Texas to bury him in that little orchard he and Claire loved so much.

*sniff*.....


got any antifreeze?
i2.listal.com
 
2013-03-14 12:50:42 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: tylerdurden217: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.
[macsmind.com image 450x451]


lulz... you posted a funny pic. That is hilarious. Bravo.

I'm indifferent to the passing of Chavez. He was a nut and obsessed with Simon Bolivar, a conspiracy theorist, opposed supposed "American Imperialism". According to Wikipedia (apologize for the lazy cut and paste) Chavez "increased government funding of health care and education, and significant reductions in poverty, according to government figures. Under Chavez, Venezuelans' quality of life improved according to a UN Index and the poverty rate fell from 48.6 percent in 2002 to 29.5 percent in 2011, according to the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America."

But perhaps at some cost because the crime rates in Venezuela increased. I'm sure his negligence had something to do with that. He was close to Castro and Ahmadinejad. What evil did Chavez engage in that offset the positive impact he had on Venezuela during his 15 years as president? Is his association with Ahmadinejad and Castro part of what makes him evil?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-14 12:58:35 PM

Big_Fat_Liar: Ned Stark: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

Yeah, remember that time Chavez killed half a million people to show up his dad too. What a bastard.

What's funny is there are people who really believe that is why the US invaded Iraq.


That's silly.  Everyone knows it was for the oil.

 What's really funny is that there are people who think there was a legitimate reason.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-14 01:00:03 PM

Sudlow: ChrisDe

"I was a little surprised that U.S. republicans didn't try this with Reagan."

Why? It's always been a big thing for the left, not the right.


Like who?  Stalin and Lennin were right wing dictators.
 
2013-03-14 01:02:20 PM

MNguy: Big_Fat_Liar:

What's funny is there are people who really believe that is why the US invaded Iraq.

Why did the US invade Iraq?


Really?  OK....

There were about a half dozen reasons given. The regime harbored terrorists (not the 9/11 ones though) or was believed to have harbored terrorists (don't blame me for inaccuracies - I didn't invade Iraq), didn't cooperate fully with inspections that were put in place following the first gulf war cease fire (recall Scott Ridder resigned because the inspections became a joke), Iraq shot at aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone, and just wasn't apologetic enough about everything. There was probably also a sense that 9/11 taught us to not let these loose ends float around out there forever. Leon Panetta likely has the most detailed list - he spent half his career advocating against Iraq.

Or there is "George Bush did it for his daddy", but that isn't a serious answer as amusing as it is.

And now I feel I need to throw out some kind of disclaimer about how I've never voted for a Bush, etc...fire can't melt steel, and so on...
 
2013-03-14 01:05:37 PM
Eh he would have wound up in some shiatty flea market anyway
 
2013-03-14 01:06:16 PM
I thought he was already embalmed and the embalming fluid was leaking out.

Leaving disappointed.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-14 01:07:45 PM
tylerdurden217:

But perhaps at some cost because the crime rates in Venezuela increased. I'm sure his negligence had something to do with that. He was close to Castro and Ahmadinejad. What evil did Chavez engage in that offset the positive impact he had on Venezuela during his 15 years as president? Is his association with Ahmadinejad and Castro part of what makes him evil?

He pissed off a lot of influential wealthy people who ran things before he came along.
 
2013-03-14 01:10:48 PM

tylerdurden217: Lt. Cheese Weasel: tylerdurden217: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.
[macsmind.com image 450x451]

lulz... you posted a funny pic. That is hilarious. Bravo.

I'm indifferent to the passing of Chavez. He was a nut and obsessed with Simon Bolivar, a conspiracy theorist, opposed supposed "American Imperialism". According to Wikipedia (apologize for the lazy cut and paste) Chavez "increased government funding of health care and education, and significant reductions in poverty, according to government figures. Under Chavez, Venezuelans' quality of life improved according to a UN Index and the poverty rate fell from 48.6 percent in 2002 to 29.5 percent in 2011, according to the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America."

But perhaps at some cost because the crime rates in Venezuela increased. I'm sure his negligence had something to do with that. He was close to Castro and Ahmadinejad. What evil did Chavez engage in that offset the positive impact he had on Venezuela during his 15 years as president? Is his association with Ahmadinejad and Castro part of what makes him evil?


The economic gains were entirely due to the price of oil going up. The surrounding nations actually saw greater growth then Venezuela.

Chavez supported the FARC rebels against Columbia both with guns and support bases. His plan to build AK-102s in Venezuela to further arm his populace ( yes he said as much) and leftist groups would filled South America with cheap full auto rifles. He didn't hate America for being imperalist, he hated that it was better at it then him
 
2013-03-14 01:15:50 PM
durbnpoisn.comli.com

It appears he won't be preserved forever.
Shoulda started earlier, guys, rather than propping him up on display.
 
2013-03-14 01:16:52 PM

Big_Fat_Liar: There were about a half dozen reasons given. The regime harbored terrorists (not the 9/11 ones though) or was believed to have harbored terrorists (don't blame me for inaccuracies - I didn't invade Iraq), didn't cooperate fully with inspections that were put in place following the first gulf war cease fire (recall Scott Ridder resigned because the inspections became a joke), Iraq shot at aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone, and just wasn't apologetic enough about everything. There was probably also a sense that 9/11 taught us to not let these loose ends float around out there forever. Leon Panetta likely has the most detailed list - he spent half his career advocating against Iraq.

Or there is "George Bush did it for his daddy", but that isn't a serious answer as amusing as it is.



Which is a fancy way of saying oil and war profiteering.

Chavez was seen as evil because he opposed American Capitalism.  People dont know thats why they've been indoctrinated into hating him, but that is why. Oh, and oil.

/You may notice a common theme....
 
2013-03-14 01:20:15 PM

zedster: The economic gains were entirely due to the price of oil going up. The surrounding nations actually saw greater growth then Venezuela.

Chavez supported the FARC rebels against Columbia both with guns and support bases. His plan to build AK-102s in Venezuela to further arm his populace ( yes he said as much) and leftist groups would filled South America with cheap full auto rifles. He didn't hate America for being imperalist, he hated that it was better at it then him


I think we hated Chavez because he was an influence in the area and that disrupts the US plan of global influence. It seems that we don't like countries that have regional influence that supersedes ours. That to me is not something I would list in the "evil" column.
 
2013-03-14 01:33:12 PM

tylerdurden217: zedster: The economic gains were entirely due to the price of oil going up. The surrounding nations actually saw greater growth then Venezuela.

Chavez supported the FARC rebels against Columbia both with guns and support bases. His plan to build AK-102s in Venezuela to further arm his populace ( yes he said as much) and leftist groups would filled South America with cheap full auto rifles. He didn't hate America for being imperalist, he hated that it was better at it then him

I think we hated Chavez because he was an influence in the area and that disrupts the US plan of global influence. It seems that we don't like countries that have regional influence that supersedes ours. That to me is not something I would list in the "evil" column.


When Chavez first started out he wasn't a radical.  He didn't start spouting revolutionary rhetoric until after the failed coup attempt against him.  The working class and poor freed him from jail and put him back in power.  I think that is when his dramatic shift toward leftist politics began.

Before Chavez came there was basically a group of wealthy families that were running the country.  Basically this is what the right-wing "populist" movement is trying to incrementally get back too.  If they are elected they will scale back all the social gains made by and for the poor / the workers.

As for Chavez arming leftist groups and governments.  Good.  There needs to be a check against Colombia/American influence.

Chavez was not a socialist and any socialist worth his/her salt will tell you the same.  Was he great for workers and the poor yes he was.  I think he has a lot of "critical" support amongst socialist (well I supported a lot of initiatives of his).

I believe the VP of Venezuela will win the upcoming election.  If he wins the election will be "rigged" according to western media outlets.  If he loses "Democracy is finally coming back to Venezuela!" will be the cry among the western media outlets and latin american circle jerks.

I think Chavez laid a good foundation of class awareness amongst the poor and the workers of Venezuela, and I believe they do not want to go back to the kind of government that was around before Chavez.
 
2013-03-14 01:35:50 PM
They should store him in a cask of brandy like Nelson.
 
2013-03-14 01:43:42 PM

tylerdurden217: Lt. Cheese Weasel: tylerdurden217: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.
[macsmind.com image 450x451]

lulz... you posted a funny pic. That is hilarious. Bravo.

I'm indifferent to the passing of Chavez. He was a nut and obsessed with Simon Bolivar, a conspiracy theorist, opposed supposed "American Imperialism". According to Wikipedia (apologize for the lazy cut and paste) Chavez "increased government funding of health care and education, and significant reductions in poverty, according to government figures. Under Chavez, Venezuelans' quality of life improved according to a UN Index and the poverty rate fell from 48.6 percent in 2002 to 29.5 percent in 2011, according to the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America."

But perhaps at some cost because the crime rates in Venezuela increased. I'm sure his negligence had something to do with that. He was close to Castro and Ahmadinejad. What evil did Chavez engage in that offset the positive impact he had on Venezuela during his 15 years as president? Is his association with Ahmadinejad and Castro part of what makes him evil?


Just a theory but making it so that anyone that spoke out against you was unemployable may have had something to do with the crime rate increasing.
 
2013-03-14 01:50:00 PM
A Madame Tussaud's wax sculpture would probably fool everyone adequately and look more lifelike.
 
2013-03-14 01:59:26 PM

tylerdurden217: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.


Hugo Chavez killed my father, raped and murdered my sister, burned my ranch, shot my dog, and stole my Bible!
 
2013-03-14 02:00:40 PM
Bush's head on a pike.jpg
 
2013-03-14 02:00:47 PM

tylerdurden217: Lt. Cheese Weasel: tylerdurden217: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.
[macsmind.com image 450x451]

lulz... you posted a funny pic. That is hilarious. Bravo.

I'm indifferent to the passing of Chavez. He was a nut and obsessed with Simon Bolivar, a conspiracy theorist, opposed supposed "American Imperialism". According to Wikipedia (apologize for the lazy cut and paste) Chavez "increased government funding of health care and education, and significant reductions in poverty, according to government figures. Under Chavez, Venezuelans' quality of life improved according to a UN Index and the poverty rate fell from 48.6 percent in 2002 to 29.5 percent in 2011, according to the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America."

But perhaps at some cost because the crime rates in Venezuela increased. I'm sure his negligence had something to do with that. He was close to Castro and Ahmadinejad. What evil did Chavez engage in that offset the positive impact he had on Venezuela during his 15 years as president? Is his association with Ahmadinejad and Castro part of what makes him evil?


Just off the top of my head...

-He supported, befriended, and funded (well, helped fund) FARC, a minority-party group of "revolutionaries" who use pretenses of politics to cover their massive narcotics business.  They were allowed to hide in his country and given assistance in exchange for quiet (violent) favors and certain political fallout we'll discuss later.

-The crime rate didn't just increase, it shot through the farking roof.  Worse still a lot of the "crime" was his political enemies getting beaten or killed.  Mind you it was never on his direct orders, he just screamed, "Will no onerid me of this turbulent priest?" and the roving gangs of "chavistas" would tend to take care of it.  Often his "enemies" weren't even clearly defined, they were just anyone who was in the skilled labor market (i.e. getting paid more than minimum wage) and wasn't covered in the right gang colorspro-chavez paraphernalia.  More on the skilled labor fallout later.

-His pattern of using "irregulars" to threaten and attack his political enemies was successful in part because he took complete control of the media.  Hours of every day would have him use the nation's version of the Emergency Broadcast System to spew propaganda.  His lies on television, radio, and in school textbooks were pretty dire and re-wrote a lot of history a la Fox news and Reagan's past.  He also used the US as a scapegoat for everything, no matter how nonsensical (your own mention of "conspiracy theorist") which isn't necessarily bad for the country, but doesn't give me any reason to be nice to his hateful, incompetent ass.

-Whenever the thugs weren't enough, he'd drum up a pretend military threat by claiming the guards at the Colombian border (there to stop FARC, remember those politics I mentioned?) were prelude to an American Invasion.  With a new not-war any dissenting voices were silenced "for national security."

-Meanwhile, the economy was collapsing.  Sure the newly-nationalized (and according to every court it's been taken to, unfairly stolen) oil business was boomin', but it was also having severe production problems because anyone with any skill in petro-engineering (those skilled laborers I mentioned?) was getting the F outta dodge.  The economy had shortages of all kinds and whenever there was a shortage (usually due to mismanagement and the skilled people moving to Canada) of what his constituents (the former peasantry) needed his response was to blame another private industry and nationalize it.  For a time there was a factory whose entire job was to take the tons and tons of food he was having to import from America, re-bag it in bags labeled "made in (Guatemala, Paraguay, Belize, or the like)" and ship it to stores so no one would know The Great Satanic America was their primary source of food.

Is he worse than Bush?  Maybe.  Apples to oranges with relative levels of power, restraining factors, and legacy make it difficult to call.  Dubya started with a country whose problems were minor or very well-buried and dove headfirst into all kinds of problems, only some of which he had control over and all of which needed complex solutions.  Chavez started with a shiathole, a VERY exploitable resource, and relatively simple problems he could apply relatively simple (if ham-fisted and inefficient) solutions to in order to make them better than they had been.

Is he more bad than good?  I'd say so, but he did a lot of good that a lot of people try to ignore.  Raising up the peasants was a good thing, his suppressing of everyone else wasn't.  Thanks to the ever-present price of oil and the replacement skilled labor finally developing its skills the Venezuelan economy is looking better than it was, say, 5 or 7 years ago but it was pretty goddamn DIRE then, and 1999 was the middle of a regular recession (pretty much worldwide) already, so his current anemic growth compared to that period is like when Bush said, "hey the economy is fixed because all the money I shoveled at defense contractors drove up the Dow!"  Disingenuous at best.  And while the nation *is* better off now (mostly) than it was in 1999 he used some pretty damn nasty means to get to some rather so-so ends.

There were a LOT of things he could have done better and a lot of things he didn't need to do at all, but he did 'em anyway because that's who he is.  His love of his country was always eclipsed by his love of himself.  Over and over he gripped power, claiming it was to protect the will of the people (no matter how many folk didn't want him to do it) because he liked power.

But this is all smoke and mirrors, it boils down to one very simple thing.  Chavez stole from imperialists when he first nationalized everything owned by foreign interests, he was a big ol' douchebag/hater, Conservative propaganda says he's as evil as everything else they hate, and this is the motherfarking INTERNET where we hate everyone; ergo Chavez was the worst thing evar.
 
2013-03-14 02:08:32 PM
TheBigJerk

Everything you accuse FARC of the Right Wing Paramilitary (government and US backed) have done, if not more-so.
 
2013-03-14 02:09:59 PM
Proving once again that the farking human race never learns from their own history. I mean, how long have we been embalming people (rhetorical question for you "try the googles" snarky people)? It aint like this is new or anything, and you would think they would find this important enough to not fark up.
 
2013-03-14 02:12:45 PM

Big_Fat_Liar: MNguy: Big_Fat_Liar:

What's funny is there are people who really believe that is why the US invaded Iraq.

Why did the US invade Iraq?

Really?  OK....

There were about a half dozen reasons given. The regime harbored terrorists (not the 9/11 ones though) or was believed to have harbored terrorists (don't blame me for inaccuracies - I didn't invade Iraq), didn't cooperate fully with inspections that were put in place following the first gulf war cease fire (recall Scott Ridder resigned because the inspections became a joke), Iraq shot at aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone, and just wasn't apologetic enough about everything. There was probably also a sense that 9/11 taught us to not let these loose ends float around out there forever. Leon Panetta likely has the most detailed list - he spent half his career advocating against Iraq.

Or there is "George Bush did it for his daddy", but that isn't a serious answer as amusing as it is.

And now I feel I need to throw out some kind of disclaimer about how I've never voted for a Bush, etc...fire can't melt steel, and so on...


"After all he tried to kill my daddy" was, actually, one of the reasons given by Bush and supported by the Keyboard Commandos as a legitimate reason to, "take the Saddam thread seriously you libby libtarded moran."  Sadly most of these same keyboard commandos "never supported the war" now, so details like that slip down the memory hole.  Reading that back I realize I should add the disclaimer that I am not accusing you of such, just lamenting an unfortunate trend and HEY we're getting tangential here.

That quote, combined with a little dime-store (i.e. a lotta guesswork) psychology and Dubya's previous pattern of failures and unmet expectations makes the case for Gee-dub having some "gotta show up daddy" issues.  It's got more grounding than the war itself did (BTW, I could swear that they never actually fired anything at those airplanes, just painted them with radar, is that wrong?)
 
2013-03-14 02:19:10 PM
Left wing derp or right wing derp? Both derps are derp, so derp for derp
 
2013-03-14 02:21:18 PM

LewDux: Left wing derp or right wing derp? Both derps are derp, so derp for derp


Back to the entertainment tab with you.

j/k you make me laugh.
 
2013-03-14 02:21:55 PM

WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:


I'm pretty liberal, and it's been a great disappointment for me to see some if my friends mourning him. I mean, I don't hate the guy as much as most people, but he was stil a narcissist. Whatever his supposed reforms may have been, he killed a democratic government in his country. Even if I agreed with everything he did, I'd still dislike him for that.
 
2013-03-14 02:25:21 PM
www.dutscher.com
 
2013-03-14 02:37:37 PM

rga184: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

I'm pretty liberal, and it's been a great disappointment for me to see some if my friends mourning him. I mean, I don't hate the guy as much as most people, but he was stil a narcissist. Whatever his supposed reforms may have been, he killed a democratic government in his country. Even if I agreed with everything he did, I'd still dislike him for that.


It's the lies, mostly.  If you honestly believe the lies that CIA assets started a violent revolution (actually it was Venezuelan citizens doing something strikingly similar to kristallnacht) and that most of the terrible things his administration did were lies and spin (they weren't) then you can pretend he was a good guy.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-14 02:41:16 PM

Big_Fat_Liar: There were about a half dozen reasons given. The regime harbored terrorists (not the 9/11 ones though) or was believed to have harbored terrorists (don't blame me for inaccuracies - I didn't invade Iraq), didn't cooperate fully with inspections that were put in place following the first gulf war cease fire (recall Scott Ridder resigned because the inspections became a joke), Iraq shot at aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone, and just wasn't apologetic enough about everything. There was probably also a sense that 9/11 taught us to not let these loose ends float around out there forever. Leon Panetta likely has the most detailed list - he spent half his career advocating against Iraq.

Or there is "George Bush did it for his daddy", but that isn't a serious answer as amusing as it is.



That last is about as plausable as any of the others.

he reason given was that we knew for certain that Iraq had WMDs, although it turned out that we didn't know any such thing, so that isn't any better.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-14 02:42:43 PM
TheBigJerk:

It's the lies, mostly.  If you honestly believe the lies that CIA assets started a violent revolution (actually it was Venezuelan citizens doing something strikingly similar to kristallnacht) and that most of the terrible things his administration did were lies and spin (they weren't) then you can pretend he was a good guy.

It's not like the CIA has ever done anything like that, in Chile or Iran for instance.
 
2013-03-14 02:43:57 PM

TheBigJerk: tylerdurden217: Lt. Cheese Weasel: tylerdurden217: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.
[macsmind.com image 450x451]

lulz... you posted a funny pic. That is hilarious. Bravo.

I'm indifferent to the passing of Chavez. He was a nut and obsessed with Simon Bolivar, a conspiracy theorist, opposed supposed "American Imperialism". According to Wikipedia (apologize for the lazy cut and paste) Chavez "increased government funding of health care and education, and significant reductions in poverty, according to government figures. Under Chavez, Venezuelans' quality of life improved according to a UN Index and the poverty rate fell from 48.6 percent in 2002 to 29.5 percent in 2011, according to the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America."

But perhaps at some cost because the crime rates in Venezuela increased. I'm sure his negligence had something to do with that. He was close to Castro and Ahmadinejad. What evil did Chavez engage in that offset the positive impact he had on Venezuela during his 15 years as president? Is his association with Ahmadinejad and Castro part of what makes him evil?

Just off the top of my head...

-He supported, befriended, and funded (well, helped fund) FARC, a minority-party group of "revolutionaries" who use pretenses of politics to cover their massive narcotics business.  They were allowed to hide in his country and given assistance in exchange for quiet (violent) favors and certain political fallout we'll discuss later.

-The crime rate didn't just increase, it shot through the farkin ...


I almost wanted to THIS this, since you got a lot of stuff right... but leaving out his close friendship and mentorship with Fidel Castro and Amadinejad was negligent, you kinda glossed over the massive list of nationalizations (many cases outright theft) of businesses that was due as much to his bullying ego as any kind of financial plan (here's a top-end list, never mind the smaller companies not covered here), you glossed over his massive repression, harassment, imprisonment and threatening of any political opposition, you didn't discuss the fact that the Venezuelan government took over all control of spending outside the country for every Venezuelan (yes, in a country where most things are imported, people have very strict limits on what they can spend in any other currency), and you didn't mention the massive devaluing of the Venezuelan currency during his rule (yes, rule, he had sweeping powers granted by a lackey congress) to the point that the black market to buy US dollars is a 25 times higher rate than the exchange rate was when he was elected.

This asshat "raised up the poor" at the expense of his entire nation's prosperity (the poor included y'know), destroyed international investment (which was critical to their economy, shown in this Foreign Direct Investment Net Inflow (% of GDP) chart, 4th down), created a nearly-communist state that supported the worst-of-the-worst oppresive regimes on the world stage, attempted to create a class warfare state against the people and businesses that kept their economy going, and espoused governmental ideals straight from Lenin.  I know on Fark that's probably great for some of you, but in the real world that amounts to oppression, economic failure and the restriction of free ideas, trade and social expression - you know, the same things that lead to the collapse of the USSR and make Cuba, Iran and North Korea such wonderful places to live.

/source: I'm married to a Venezuelan, we have family there and bunches of friends who own or work at prosperous businesses (several not so prosperous in the last decade thanks to this dead clown), have seen this stuff first hand and we visit once to multiple times a year for 15 years running
//this is still lost on some of you, but you're likely only Chavez sympathizers just 'cause he stood up to the Bushiatler anyway
 
2013-03-14 02:44:36 PM
api.ning.com
 
2013-03-14 02:58:39 PM

gunga galunga: Hugo Chavez killed my father, raped and murdered my sister, burned my ranch, shot my dog, and stole my Bible!


So what you're saying is that you want to go to Colombia and have Michael Douglas put his face in your muddy crotch?

/Aw, man! The Doobie Brothers broke up! Shiat, when did that happen?
 
2013-03-14 02:59:02 PM
Speaking of Farc...  On Jeopardy!, last night...  The answer to a question was, "FARC".  I started cacking up because the guy who answered the question was named Drew.

I thought it was funny...
 
2013-03-14 02:59:18 PM
A Latin American government can't manage to properly handle a procedure that has been successfully performed for 5000 years? Color me shocked.

I had already figured it was going to be at least another 800 years before they finally mastered double-entry bookkeeping, but this is ridiculous.
 
2013-03-14 03:05:30 PM
Do you want to know why Chavez or anyone else is distrustful of US influence in South America? It's because of our abysmal track record down there.

Just take a look at our wonderful Secretary of State Mr. Kissinger from the 70s:

"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves."

Notice how democracy is bad when the capitalists are voted out.  Whenever the capitalists are voted out it's because the people just don't understand what is good for them so we need to go in there and take it over by force.

/Hopes for a continued Bolivarian revolution
 
2013-03-14 03:11:45 PM

FarkedOver: Do you want to know why Chavez or anyone else is distrustful of US influence in South America? It's because of our abysmal track record down there.

Just take a look at our wonderful Secretary of State Mr. Kissinger from the 70s:

"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves."

Notice how democracy is bad when the capitalists are voted out.  Whenever the capitalists are voted out it's because the people just don't understand what is good for them so we need to go in there and take it over by force.

/Hopes for a continued Bolivarian revolution


All Chavez did (and Castro and Lenin and Mao, etc...) was shuffle the deck of cards a bit and change the labels of oppression.

There, you happy?
 
2013-03-14 03:12:34 PM
"Notice how democracy is bad when the capitalists are voted out.  Whenever the capitalists are voted out it's because the people just don't understand what is good for them so we need to go in there and take it over by force. "

Like notice how the left is all for individual liberty unless they think its bad for them and then its all sacrifice for the greater good.
 
2013-03-14 03:15:03 PM

TheBigJerk: Just off the top of my head...

-He supported, befriended, and funded (well, helped fund) FARC, a minority-party group of "revolutionaries" who use pretenses of politics to cover their massive narcotics business.  They were allowed to hide in his country and given assistance in exchange for quiet (violent) favors and certain political fallout we'll discuss later.

-The crime rate didn't just increase, it shot through the farking roof.  Worse still a lot of the "crime" was his political enemies getting beaten or killed.  Mind you it was never on his direct orders, he just screamed, "Will no onerid me of this turbulent priest?" and the roving gangs of "chavistas" would tend to take care of it.  Often his "enemies" weren't even clearly defined, they were just anyone who was in the skilled labor market (i.e. getting paid more than minimum wage) and wasn't covered in the right gang colorspro-chavez paraphernalia.  More on the skilled labor fallout later.

-His pattern of using "irregulars" to threaten and attack his political enemies was successful in part because he took complete control of the media.  Hours of every day would have him use the nation's version of the Emergency Broadcast System to spew propaganda.  His lies on television, radio, and in school textbooks were pretty dire and re-wrote a lot of history a la Fox news and Reagan's past.  He also used the US as a scapegoat for everything, no matter how nonsensical (your own mention of "conspiracy theorist") which isn't necessarily bad for the country, but doesn't give me any reason to be nice to his hateful, incompetent ass.

-Whenever the thugs weren't enough, he'd drum up a pretend military threat by claiming the guards at the Colombian border (there to stop FARC, remember those politics I mentioned?) were prelude to an American Invasion.  With a new not-war any dissenting voices were silenced "for national security."

-Meanwhile, the economy was collapsing.  Sure the newly-nationalized (and according to ever ...


This is really good stuff and I appreciate it. When I asked the question of why he was evil in some eyes, I meant it sincerely. I guess I need to read more on the subject. All in all, he sounds to have been more inept and corrupt than "evil", Clearly I know a lot less than you and several other people in this thread.
 
2013-03-14 03:15:56 PM
I don't understand this whole veneration of dead bodies thing, just burn the farker already. And me too when I die.
 
2013-03-14 03:18:36 PM

hdhale: FarkedOver: Do you want to know why Chavez or anyone else is distrustful of US influence in South America? It's because of our abysmal track record down there.

Just take a look at our wonderful Secretary of State Mr. Kissinger from the 70s:

"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves."

Notice how democracy is bad when the capitalists are voted out.  Whenever the capitalists are voted out it's because the people just don't understand what is good for them so we need to go in there and take it over by force.

/Hopes for a continued Bolivarian revolution

All Chavez did (and Castro and Lenin and Mao, etc...) was shuffle the deck of cards a bit and change the labels of oppression.

There, you happy?


I don't mind oppression, as long as you oppress the owning class.  I mean that's a page right out of the State and Revolution play book.
 
2013-03-14 03:22:53 PM

Virtue: Like notice how the left is all for individual liberty unless they think its bad for them and then its all sacrifice for the greater good.


The greater good is a better excuse than the randian philosophy of we should be as free as possible...free to make as much, free to exploit as much.... why? Because people are dicks and there is no hope of change ever so just roll with it.
 
2013-03-14 03:24:13 PM
: I just want to say one word to you. Just one word.
: Yes, sir.
: Are you listening?
: Yes, I am.
: Plastination.
 
2013-03-14 03:25:24 PM

FarkedOver: I don't mind oppression, as long as you oppress the owning class.  I mean that's a page right out of the State and Revolution play book.


It's not fascism when our side does it!

fc09.deviantart.net
 
2013-03-14 03:25:28 PM

FarkedOver: hdhale: FarkedOver: Do you want to know why Chavez or anyone else is distrustful of US influence in South America? It's because of our abysmal track record down there.

Just take a look at our wonderful Secretary of State Mr. Kissinger from the 70s:

"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves."

Notice how democracy is bad when the capitalists are voted out.  Whenever the capitalists are voted out it's because the people just don't understand what is good for them so we need to go in there and take it over by force.

/Hopes for a continued Bolivarian revolution

All Chavez did (and Castro and Lenin and Mao, etc...) was shuffle the deck of cards a bit and change the labels of oppression.

There, you happy?

I don't mind oppression, as long as you oppress the owning class.  I mean that's a page right out of the State and Revolution play book.


And in Venezuela poor are owning class (according to Chavez)
 
2013-03-14 03:29:39 PM

hardinparamedic: FarkedOver: I don't mind oppression, as long as you oppress the owning class.  I mean that's a page right out of the State and Revolution play book.

It's not fascism when our side does it!

[fc09.deviantart.net image 400x240]


Fascism is based on nationalism.  Socialism/communism/anarchism all best on internationalism.

Do some reading.

LewDux: And in Venezuela poor are owning class (according to Chavez)


He can say that, but they weren't.  Workers should collectively own everything.  Once workers are in control there becomes no more class distinction, or so the theory goes.

If you would all like to read more in leftist philosophy check this out: www.marxists.org.

You might learn what is you all hate so much.  You might be shocked to find you don't hate it so much.
 
2013-03-14 03:31:13 PM
somebody find carl and get him inthe house.

/just to be safe.
 
2013-03-14 03:39:43 PM

FarkedOver: hardinparamedic: FarkedOver: I don't mind oppression, as long as you oppress the owning class.  I mean that's a page right out of the State and Revolution play book.

It's not fascism when our side does it!

[fc09.deviantart.net image 400x240]

Fascism is based on nationalism.  Socialism/communism/anarchism all best on internationalism.

Do some reading.

LewDux: And in Venezuela poor are owning class (according to Chavez)

He can say that, but they weren't.  Workers should collectively own everything.  Once workers are in control there becomes no more class distinction, or so the theory goes.

If you would all like to read more in leftist philosophy check this out: www.marxists.org.

You might learn what is you all hate so much.  You might be shocked to find you don't hate it so much.


I don't hate leftist Philosophy or even Marxism. I "hate" then "Leftism-based" propaganda is used for personal motives.
 
2013-03-14 03:40:30 PM
They should have embalmed him before he died, just to be sure.

//lude
 
2013-03-14 03:41:07 PM

FarkedOver: Fascism is based on nationalism.  Socialism/communism/anarchism all best on internationalism.

Do some reading.


Really? Communism was based on internationalism? Because I'm pretty sure in the form it was implemented in, it was based on strong central government control of production and worker output, while also strictly controlling localized economic conditions and marked by rapid, aggressive expansionism and proxy wars in the same manner as the "evil capitalists" were vilified for?

FarkedOver: Once workers are in control there becomes no more class distinction, or so the theory goes.


Except for the fact that, historically, no "communist" state has ever achieved this. In reality, what they have achieved is a pseudo-capitalistic system in which the central party obtain riches, power, and prestige  while oppressing and misleading the common worker - which the centralized party has exhalted above all else as the center of the nation. In addition to this, Communist/"socialist" countries have traditionally executed incredible power and control over the media and over traditional freedoms that modern humanity has come to consider basic rights of man.

FarkedOver: You might learn what is you all hate so much.  You might be shocked to find you don't hate it so much.


Social Democratic principles have nothing to do with Marxist Socialism, or Leninistic Communism. They are, in fact, completely in opposition to them due to the requirement of the stripping of human rights from the working class that has been required for every communist nation to rise in power.
 
2013-03-14 03:41:24 PM

hardinparamedic: It's not fascism when our side does it!


Further, we can deconstruct this bit of moronic screed on your part by defining fascism and then defining what socialism is.

Fascism, according to Mussolini is the marriage of corporation and state.

What is socialism?  I'm sure most think is just the government creating a giant welfare state for a bunch of freeloading jerk offs.  Well, historically, that is not what socialism is.  Socialism is when the workers control the means of production.
 
2013-03-14 03:44:11 PM

FarkedOver: Socialism is when the workers control the means of production.


And in reality, the central party controlled the means of production, while oppressing the working class. Soviet Russia, the People's Republic, every major communist/"socialist" country that has claimed to follow Marxist principles has done so, while committing some of the worst atrocities known to man.

Please, don't try to whitewash history. You look like an idiot when you do so. Shall we ask the Ukrainians how well that "worker control of the means of production" worked for them?
 
2013-03-14 03:50:45 PM

hardinparamedic: Really? Communism was based on internationalism? Because I'm pretty sure in the form it was implemented in, it was based on strong central government control of production and worker output, while also strictly controlling localized economic conditions and marked by rapid, aggressive expansionism and proxy wars in the same manner as the "evil capitalists" were vilified for?


You're thinking of Stalinism.  He advocated socialism in one country which is about as anti-marxist/ anti communist as you can get.  Trotsky was more in line with permanent revolution.

hardinparamedic: Except for the fact that, historically, no "communist" state has ever achieved this. In reality, what they have achieved is a pseudo-capitalistic system in which the central party obtain riches, power, and prestige while oppressing and misleading the common worker - which the centralized party has exhalted above all else as the center of the nation. In addition to this, Communist/"socialist" countries have traditionally executed incredible power and control over the media and over traditional freedoms that modern humanity has come to consider basic rights of man


No "state" has achieved this, which is why I think it is worth working for one day.

hardinparamedic: Social Democratic principles have nothing to do with Marxist Socialism, or Leninistic Communism. They are, in fact, completely in opposition to them due to the requirement of the stripping of human rights from the working class that has been required for every communist nation to rise in power.


As we've established no communist nation has existed.  So we cannot say communism/socialism is the source of the stripping away of rights of the workers.
 
2013-03-14 03:52:35 PM

hardinparamedic: Please, don't try to whitewash history. You look like an idiot when you do so. Shall we ask the Ukrainians how well that "worker control of the means of production" worked for them?


I didn't come in here to defend Stalin or his collectivization (I'm more of a 4th International kind of guy).  Thanks though.  I'm not whitewashing history.  I'm telling you the actual definitions of communism and scientific socialism.
 
2013-03-14 03:53:41 PM

CygnusDarius: WhoopAssWayne: floating around reddit today:

[img823.imageshack.us image 295x445]

Yes, but Reddit is a hive of malcontents, social misfits, and sexual misanthropists.

The only difference of them and us, is that most of us are drunk.


Also most of US are old enough to drink.  Reddit is largely highschool kids.  (despite them creating false statistics showing otherwise, and getting busted doing it)  80% of all posts on reddits front page are made by someone under 19 years old.
 
2013-03-14 03:59:04 PM

hardinparamedic: while committing some of the worst atrocities known to man.


Notice how stats are really kept regarding atrocities committed by capitalist/free market nations? The number is astronomically higher.
 
2013-03-14 04:05:22 PM

FarkedOver: Notice how stats are really kept regarding atrocities committed by capitalist/free market nations? The number is astronomically higher.


I wish someone would just ask the Poles and Ukrainians whether they prefer communism, fascism, or free-market liberalism. They're about the only countries to experience all three in rapid succession.
 
2013-03-14 04:19:43 PM

hardinparamedic: while committing some of the worst atrocities known to man.


SHHHHHHHHHHH!  There are Jews in here, and they can't acknowledge that anyone but them endured such atrocities.
 
2013-03-14 04:31:15 PM

arethereanybeernamesleft: SHHHHHHHHHHH!  There are Jews in here, and they can't acknowledge that anyone but them endured such atrocities.


Go away. If you want to pretend that the holocaust didn't have several factors which made it unique among the genocides in history, I really don't want your help.
 
2013-03-14 04:39:11 PM

FarkedOver: pseudoscientific socialism.

Fixed that for you. There is no "scientific" socialism. There ARE Social Democratic Philosophies, but these in no way resemble the system that Marx or Lenin intended to create.

FarkedOver: Notice how stats are really kept regarding atrocities committed by capitalist/free market nations? The number is astronomically higher


twimg0-a.akamaihd.net

Tell us about the systematic genocides and willful mass murder that pseudo-capitalistic societies across the past two hundred years have engaged in.

Communism, "Leninistic Socialism", and Fascism/Toltarianism by and large have the highest body count, among other horrors.

FarkedOver: As we've established no communist nation has existed.  So we cannot say communism/socialism is the source of the stripping away of rights of the workers.


Communism is unattainable in a modern age. Communes simply cannot produce, independently, the means for self sufficiency in the modern information age.

Ignoring the "No True Scotsman" fallacy here, which in and of itself ignores the fact that every attempt at Communism or Socialism started with the exact philosophies you have espoused and have fallen victim to basic human nature - greed and lust for power - which is made all the more easier by the party being considered both central and infallible.

It's either one, or the other. You cannot have a system which both protects the common worker from being taken advantage of, and also prevents abuse of power from the central bureaucracy.
 
2013-03-14 04:40:35 PM

hardinparamedic: Go away. If you want to pretend that the holocaust didn't have several factors which made it unique among the genocides in history, I really don't want your help.


1.  Wasn't helping you.

2.  Genocides are genocides.  "Unique genocide", when spoken of in the plural, is an automatic oxymoron.  In other words, a single genocide could be unique.  But the manner of death or system that carried it out does not make a genocide unique.  The fact that there have been numerous genocides means that the Holocaust cannot be unique.

3.  No, I am not a Nazi apologist, or any other hyperbolic characterization that you may try to discredit me with.

4.  Get over it, and yourself.

5.  You might be interested to know that the Japanese killed more people in China than the Germans killed Jews.  But hey, I guess if you didn't tattoo them and cremate them, then it's not "unique" enough.
 
2013-03-14 04:48:32 PM

tylerdurden217: I promise that I'm not trolling here. What specifically did Chavez do that was so evil? Great leader? No, but he did focus on poverty, the influence of oil money in politics, human rights, etc. Maybe those efforts were just a failure, but I'm missing why this guy is compared to some of the worst tyrants in history (not on Fark necessarily, but elsewhere)

I'm not a fan, but I'm not pissing on his grave either.


And amassed 2 BILLION dollars in his own personal bank accounts. He focused on the poor (and they are still poor) and the evil corporations alright..and cha-chinged for himself.
 
2013-03-14 04:50:07 PM
hardinparamedic:  This text is now purple:

You guys are arguing with FarkedOver, who posted a big red flag in the Chavez death thread with a "Rest in Peace, Comrade" attached.  You're not going to convince him/her of the errors in communism or socialist or the ideals of the far left.

Useful idiots like him/her will never understand what Farkers like  Maq0r or kittypoo have been trying to tell them - hardcore communist-wannabes are too in love with the dogma and the socialist dream to bother to listen.
 
2013-03-14 04:59:11 PM

Seraphym: seful idiots like him/her will never understand what Farkers like  Maq0r or kittypoo have been trying to tell them - hardcore communist-wannabes are too in love with the dogma and the socialist dream to bother to listen.


Or maybe they're just paid shills and trolls who enjoy the lulz?  You decide.  I'm going with what's behind curtain #2.
 
2013-03-14 05:06:06 PM
msnbcmedia.msn.com

I call "dibs" on the Windex (TM) concession!
 
2013-03-14 05:06:08 PM

Seraphym: hardinparamedic:  This text is now purple:

You guys are arguing with FarkedOver, who posted a big red flag in the Chavez death thread with a "Rest in Peace, Comrade" attached.  You're not going to convince him/her of the errors in communism or socialist or the ideals of the far left.

Useful idiots like him/her will never understand what Farkers like  Maq0r or kittypoo have been trying to tell them - hardcore communist-wannabes are too in love with the dogma and the socialist dream to bother to listen.


Well you can just enjoy your capitalist dream.  Capitalism is great as long as you have the weapons to prop up your system.
 
2013-03-14 05:09:47 PM

Evil Mackerel: They  should encase him in LucCarbonite.


FTFHan

collider.com
 
2013-03-14 05:10:04 PM
Capitalist Venezuela was just sunshine and lollipops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caracazo
 
2013-03-14 05:19:31 PM

hardinparamedic: Tell us about the systematic genocides and willful mass murder that pseudo-capitalistic societies across the past two hundred years have engaged in.


I would say all the atrocities committed under the fascist banner fall under the capitalism banner as well.  After all, what is fascism but a capitalist reaction.
 
2013-03-14 05:23:06 PM
Who are these people who feel so strongly for their leaders that they cry and sob and visit their grave?
 
2013-03-14 05:25:30 PM

Alonjar: Who are these people who feel so strongly for their leaders that they cry and sob and visit their grave?


Think about this: Because of Chavez this is the first time some people had access to health care and learned to read..... That's kind of a big deal.  People don't seem to forget that.
 
2013-03-14 05:29:28 PM

Alonjar: Who are these people who feel so strongly for their leaders that they cry and sob and visit their grave?


Republicans at a post-election Romney party.
 
2013-03-14 05:29:47 PM
And the list grows by one. Nothing of value lost.

FarkedOver: I would say all the atrocities committed under the fascist banner fall under the capitalism banner as well.  After all, what is fascism but a capitalist reaction.


And I would point out to you that "capitalism", in the way you seem to use it, would preclude state control over the means and manner of production, and the use of quotas and slave labor as part of genocidal ambitions which those Governments were known to use.

I would also point out that "capitalism", in the way you use it, ignores the fact that a "capitalist" society does not exist anywhere on Earth. In reality, what we have are different forms of pseudocapitalism, where the state does not regulate production and output, but rather regulates the conditions by which products can be sold, and workers can be used.
 
2013-03-14 05:34:58 PM

hardinparamedic: and workers can be used.


That sums up all capitalism right there haha.
 
2013-03-14 05:36:02 PM

FarkedOver: That sums up all capitalism right there haha.


gulaghistory.org

Sums up communism pretty well.
 
2013-03-14 05:50:07 PM

hardinparamedic: FarkedOver: That sums up all capitalism right there haha.

[gulaghistory.org image 700x536]

Sums up communism Stalinism pretty well.


Fixed for accuracy
 
2013-03-14 05:50:54 PM

FarkedOver: Fixed for accuracy


fallacyaday.com
 
2013-03-14 05:52:43 PM

hardinparamedic: FarkedOver: Fixed for accuracy

[fallacyaday.com image 300x300]


So there is no difference between Stalinism or Trotskism? Hell even Maoism or Blanquists?  Thanks for the history lesson professor!
 
2013-03-14 05:58:37 PM

FarkedOver: So there is no difference between Stalinism or Trotskism? Hell even Maoism or Blanquists? Thanks for the history lesson professor!


But every genocide is unique.  This guy sees differences where there are none, and denies them where there are.
 
2013-03-14 06:03:37 PM

hardinparamedic: FarkedOver: That sums up all capitalism right there haha.

[gulaghistory.org image 700x536]

Sums up communism pretty well.


You are aware the gulags existed prior to Bolshevik revolution?  You are aware that many Bolsheviks and Mensheviks were sent to Sibera under the imperialist Czar's orders.

Not defending Stalin, BUT not everyone who went to the gulag was a saint.

I swear to god every death be it from an accidental choking to the flu.... if it happened under a "communist" government it gets attributed as a death as a direct result of those dirty reds.
 
2013-03-14 06:05:59 PM

arethereanybeernamesleft: FarkedOver: So there is no difference between Stalinism or Trotskism? Hell even Maoism or Blanquists? Thanks for the history lesson professor!

But every genocide is unique.  This guy sees differences where there are none, and denies them where there are.


I read your profile.

"I am not a racist (even though I'm from Texas), but I do believe that there is one ethnic group out there that is close to 100% bad."

I hope you aren't serious about that statement man....
 
2013-03-14 06:13:43 PM

hardinparamedic: Of course there are differences. But somehow, your idea of communism will not fall prey to ANY of the problems that their version of communism fell victim to?

Look. lie to yourself, but don't lie to everyone else.


Sadly when Trotsky tried to assert himself over Stalin, he ended up with an ice pick in the back of his skull.

As a trotskyist you can understand why I'm really no fan of Stalin.  He was a state capitalist, not a socialist or communist.  Hell, Stalin hired the Koch brother's father to do infrastructure work in Russia..... where do you think they made their fortune? That's right they made their billions off of daddy and his sucking Rubles from a tyrants cock.

I'm not lying when I say Trotskyism offers the best hope of socialists and workers controlling society.  Instead of socialism in one country Trotsky, rightfully, explains if socialism is going to work, everyone needs to be on board.  I have no illusions that this is an impossible task.  I also have no illusions that capitalism is not the best system humans can achieve.
 
2013-03-14 08:16:42 PM
From the New York Time, worth a read:

Venezuela, More Deadly Than Iraq, Wonders Why

By SIMON ROMERO
Published: August 22, 2010
New York Times

CARACAS, Venezuela - Some here joke that they might be safer if they lived in Baghdad. The numbers bear them out.

In Iraq, a country with about the same population as Venezuela, there were 4,644 civilian deaths from violence in 2009, according to Iraq Body Count; in Venezuela that year, the number of murders climbed above 16,000.

-- New York Times
 
2013-03-14 09:25:49 PM
Just make a wax model of the idiot, stick him in a glass case.  The dopes in that country will most
likely believe it anyway, on until the air conditioner goes off LOL.
 
2013-03-14 10:01:47 PM

MNguy: Big_Fat_Liar:

What's funny is there are people who really believe that is why the US invaded Iraq.

Why did the US invade Iraq?


It was because it was becomming to hot in desert to keep all those troops on hold.

At one point you just have to ignore all Saddams complying and get it over with.

Chavez is an example of what happends of stuff gets left out to long in the sun.
 
2013-03-14 10:55:12 PM

Virtue: "Notice how democracy is bad when the capitalists are voted out.  Whenever the capitalists are voted out it's because the people just don't understand what is good for them so we need to go in there and take it over by force. "

Like notice how the left is all for individual liberty unless they think its bad for them and then its all sacrifice for the greater good.


i2.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-03-14 11:27:33 PM

FarkedOver: hardinparamedic: It's not fascism when our side does it!

Further, we can deconstruct this bit of moronic screed on your part by defining fascism and then defining what socialism is.

Fascism, according to Mussolini is the marriage of corporation and state.

What is socialism?  I'm sure most think is just the government creating a giant welfare state for a bunch of freeloading jerk offs.  Well, historically, that is not what socialism is.  Socialism is when the workers control the means of production.


I realize you're each calling the other wrong and dumb, but personally I'm impressed with both of you.  I'm not sure which of you is right (or "more" right), but it's interesting to read, at the very least.
 
2013-03-14 11:29:23 PM
FTA: "Russian and German scientists have arrived to embalm Chavez and they tell us it's very difficult because the process should have started earlier ... Maybe we can't do it,'' acting President Nicolas Maduro said in televised comments on Wednesday.

Bollocks.

Chavez hoped to be preserved as an eternal symbol of the Bolivarian state. New boy wants to make his mark and take over, it's in his interests to let Chavez rot.
 
2013-03-14 11:51:29 PM

FarkedOver: Sadly when Trotsky tried to assert himself over Stalin, he ended up with an ice pick in the back of his skull.

As a trotskyist you can understand why I'm really no fan of Stalin. He was a state capitalist, not a socialist or communist. Hell, Stalin hired the Koch brother's father to do infrastructure work in Russia..... where do you think they made their fortune? That's right they made their billions off of daddy and his sucking Rubles from a tyrants cock.

I'm not lying when I say Trotskyism offers the best hope of socialists and workers controlling society. Instead of socialism in one country Trotsky, rightfully, explains if socialism is going to work, everyone needs to be on board. I have no illusions that this is an impossible task. I also have no illusions that capitalism is not the best system humans can achieve.


I can understand what you're saying here, but I still disagree with it. I'm unwilling, as a human being, to sell my rights and liberties away under the guise of a "better system" just to stick it to the evil corporations, and in doing so create a system which has historically been immune or, at the very least, openly hostile against checks and balances to central power.

We're going to have to agree to disagree, but I would like to point out that Social Democratic principles which maintain the human rights of all, while still providing a safety net for the lower class are attainable without a single, unified global government, and will probibly take more of a prominance in the United States once the old guard, "ZOMG EVIL SOCIALISM" baby boomers die out.

I actually see our country becoming more like Japan in that aspect, especially in terms of healthcare, as the decades pass.
 
2013-03-15 12:42:59 AM

tylerdurden217: Under Chavez, Venezuelans' quality of life improved according to a UN Index and the poverty rate fell from 48.6 percent in 2002 to 29.5 percent in 2011, according to the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America."


Much of South America in general saw an economic boom during the same period.  Venezuela actually saw the poorest (least) growth among it's regional neighbors.  It is probably more accurate to say that Venezuela experienced some growth despite Chavez's bizarre economic policies and siphoning off personal fortunes.
 
2013-03-15 02:33:56 AM

FarkedOver: hardinparamedic: Really? Communism was based on internationalism? Because I'm pretty sure in the form it was implemented in, it was based on strong central government control of production and worker output, while also strictly controlling localized economic conditions and marked by rapid, aggressive expansionism and proxy wars in the same manner as the "evil capitalists" were vilified for?

You're thinking of Stalinism. He advocated socialism in one country which is about as anti-marxist/ anti communist as you can get. Trotsky was more in line with permanent revolution.


And what he was supposed to do? Practically

FarkedOver: hardinparamedic: FarkedOver: That sums up all capitalism right there haha.

[gulaghistory.org image 700x536]

Sums up communism pretty well.

You are aware the gulags existed prior to Bolshevik revolution?  You are aware that many Bolsheviks and Mensheviks were sent to Sibera under the imperialist Czar's orders.

Not defending Stalin, BUT not everyone who went to the gulag was a saint.

I swear to god every death be it from an accidental choking to the flu.... if it happened under a "communist" government it gets attributed as a death as a direct result of those dirty reds.


Could you finish sentence "not defending Hitler, but...", pretty pretty please please. I know you can do it
 
2013-03-15 02:35:51 AM
And do you think October revolution was really revolution?
 
2013-03-15 02:56:33 AM

tylerdurden217: This is really good stuff and I appreciate it. When I asked the question of why he was evil in some eyes, I meant it sincerely. I guess I need to read more on the subject. All in all, he sounds to have been more inept and corrupt than "evil", Clearly I know a lot less than you and several other people in this thread.


While conservative propagandists will HAPPILY expand, inflate, exaggerate, and make up crimes he's committed they are still useful sources if you can read between the lines of what was done and what is heavily spun.  Chavez' alliances with dickholes like Ahmadinejad, for example, aren't actually that relevant considering how international politics work, and for another his rampant theft of foreign assets is tempered by the fact that most of those assets were stolen (arguably) from the nation with the usual imperialist bribe-extort-or-steal methods.  Yet he still HAS those alliances and he still stole a lot of shiat (and rather impartial international courts have agreed that he stole it.)   And while most of his political opponents just get beaten by roving gangs of Chavistas (Think "teabagger" but young, fit, and as physically violent as their rhetoric) his actual police still torture and murder folk under false pretenses.

It's an interesting subject to me, but that's because I'm a damned dirty politics junkie.


FarkedOver: TheBigJerk

Everything you accuse FARC of the Right Wing Paramilitary (government and US backed) have done, if not more-so.


Incredibly vague, inaccurate, and responding to things I'm pretty sure I never even said.  I didn't talk about FARC that much.  Why don't you just dive in and embarrass yourself telling us about FARC and how awesome I guess they are?  That'll be more interesting than this stalin-trotsky-communism-blaaaaaah going on.
 
2013-03-15 05:29:23 AM
Colombia is where cocaine
 
2013-03-15 12:10:38 PM

ransack.: Colombia is where cocaine


...?

Why yes, yes it is.   *pats head*
 
Displayed 144 of 144 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report