Pots and Kettles: Al Jazeera story implicitly criticizes Hugo Chavez's last move toward socialism

You gotta love it when Al Jazeera runs a piece covering the lastest Chavez reforms in Venezuela, and gives all the comment space to his opponents:

Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president, has pushed through 26 new laws, covering changes in areas ranging from the military to small businesses.

The package of laws, which were published in the official gazette on Monday, were enacted on July 31, the final day of an 18-month period during which Chavez had been granted special legislative powers.

The new laws includes measures which would set up neighbourhood-based militias, move the country towards a socialist economy and increase state control over agriculture.

The decrees met with opposition from Fedecamaras, the Venezuelan federation of chambers of commerce.

Jose Manuel Gonzalez, a business chamber leader of Fedecamaras, said: "We ask the president: Why does he fear democracy?"

He said that the package of laws included socialist concepts that voters rejected last year as part of a proposed overhaul of Venezuela's constitution.

"We are sure that this is nothing more than imposing the reform project that was rejected in December," Gonzalez said.

Among the goodies in the package:

Under one of the new laws, food retailers or distributors caught skirting government-imposed price controls or hoarding products would be punished with up to six years in prison.

Business owners who refuse to produce, import, transport or sell "items of basic necessity" would face up to 10 years in jail.

The decree also allows the government to "restrict or prohibit the import, export, distribution, exchange or sale" of certain foods or agricultural products and "take over distribution activities when considered necessary".

Other measures increase state control over commerce, services and publicity. Businesses that violate the new rules could face fines or indefinite closure.

I always knew Al Jazeera was just a shil for the world capitalist revolution.

Comments

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

Search This Blog