Talk:Hugo Chavez

2009-09-21T12:28:35Z

DavidJeremiah:

This page appears fine to me. Citations are needed throughout the article, but as far as everything else goes, I approve. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 05:18, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

== Thanks ==

I'll get to work on some citations, but thankyou for accepting it, It's good to see some objectivity on this site. =)
==This article is surprisingly neutral==
I'm impressed that this article is surprisingly neutral towards Chavez, I figured it would call him a totalitarian communist.--[[User:DemocraticSocialist|DemocraticSocialist]] 11:50, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:He's more of a '''greedy''' communist robber baron. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:36, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
It must be liberal subversion hahahaha--[[User:DemocraticSocialist|DemocraticSocialist]] 11:51, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

:Sorry to burst the bubble. He has been referred to as a dictator [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:AboutC&oldid=139640 here]. Have patience this article will eventually follow suit. [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 11:59, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

I knew it was too good to be true. While Castro is a dictator, Chavez who was elected by almost two thirds of the population is clearly not --[[User:DemocraticSocialist|DemocraticSocialist]] 14:58, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:We're waiting for Castro to die before her passes the baton. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:27, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
==Dictator!!!!????==
How can someone who is democratically elected be referred to as a dictator --[[User:ScandalousHegemony|ScandalousHegemony]] 23:57, 23 May 2007 (EDT)
:How about that Hitler guy in 1933? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:16, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
::...Who was not democratically elected. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğ''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 21:17, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
::: Maybe the question should be, "how can someone who continues to hold democratic elections at the frequency prescribed in the nations constitution (Like Mr. Chavez for example) be called a dictator?" The answer to that question is, he cannot. Because he isn't. Like it or not, Hugo Chavez is the democraticly elected leader of a democratic country and any suggestion that he is a dictator is little more than an insult to democracy. How can this website call Chavez a Dictator, but not someone like General [[Pinochet]] of Chile??? This 'encyclopedia' gets progressively more ridiculous by the day. Unless someone either 'locks this page for editing' or gives me some very good evidence to suggest that I am wrong about Mr. Chavez and his democratic government I will delete the word 'Dictator' from this entry.
:::::: Oh look, how suprising. It's already been locked. That's it. I've had enough of Conservapedia. You have to look less hard to find the truth in UNcyclopedia than Conservapedia. At least they admit they are a comedy parody of the truth. And at least they dont get all angry because I choose to spell suprising with an 's' instead of a 'z'.

It doesn't matter how he got into power, especially if he significantly increases his power while in office. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:19, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
:Chavez does not have a record of increasing his power, merely changing the economy to having a socialist slant. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğ''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 21:21, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
::*actually, he does [http://www.mywire.com/pubs/ForeignPolicy/2006/01/01/1111144/print]. Chavez is an autocrat.[[User:Bohdan|Богдан]] [[User talk:Bohdan|Talk]] 21:28, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
I used to have neighbors from Venezuela whose relatives were on Chavez's hit list. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:28, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
:Not surprising. Mr. Homimachong seems to be a fan of Kim Jong il and Hitler and Saddam Husseien, and he can't NOT be a fan of someone like Chavez. If you liked Hitler, you'll like Chavez! '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 14:18, 29 November 2007 (EST)

== chavez IS NOT a dictator ==

you conservatives all suck. how can someone who was democratically elected be considered
a dictator? you are all a bunch of imperialist fascists!

I'm with you. How can those so-called pious and self righteous conservatives praise Chiang Kai Shek but then call Chavez a "reppresive dicator"? The only people that he isn't popular with are the rich Venezualans, the blood sucking capitalist oil companies, and of course, those idiotic right-wing American politicans! The majority of Venezualans support Chavez. It was because of him that the poverty rate in the country is going down. This inevitably proves that Socialism will defeat capitalism. As Mao Tse Tung said "However much the reactionaries try to hold back the wheel of history, sooner or later revolution will take place and inevitably triumph".

:Typical non-spelling, America-hating fascist liberal, accusing others of fascism! Go to Venezuela. '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 14:14, 29 November 2007 (EST)
:And Hitler was also voted in democratically. Are you going to say that he was Germany's "president"? '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 14:15, 29 November 2007 (EST)
::We 'wouldn't' say that Hitler was Germany's "president," considering that he abolished the office after Paul von Hindenburg's death. Nor was he democratically elected. He was 'appointed' to the chancellorship by Hindenburg, and then assumed presidential powers after Hindenburg's death that he was never intended to have. Hence, as Chavez is a democratically elected head of state, you need greater evidence that he is a "dictator." [[User:Agnapostate|Agnapostate]] 01:02, 23 December 2008 (EST)

== Irony ==

Guys, you lost me at "Repressive Dictator". Can you really not see the irony in this skewed, worthless article namecalling democratically elected foreign (to you) leaders?. Someone please kill this article as it is embarassed by it's own existence.

Can anyone actually explain the point of this article; a blinkered, one sided repressive waste of time projecting its own ignorance onto others. Really there is no point to it. {{unsigned|Mrivpond}}

== What a disgrace. ==

How can anyone seriously type that he is a repressive dictator? He was democratically election every single time, his new bid to remove term limits is being done by REFERENDUM.. are you guys on something, how is he a dictator in '''ANY WAY'''?

And don't get me started on this RCTV stuff, he closed it down because it actively called for a violent revolution against him, and then when that actually occured and an ACTUAL DICTATORSHIP was put in place, it just ran anti-Chavez ads the entire time, then when the dictatorship was crumbling as the people fought back to put Chavez back in, instead of running actual news saying this, it showed dramas like the Bold and the Beautiful. And so when it came around the renewing the liscence for it, he refused. '''ANY COUNTRY WOULD DO THIS''', If there was a television channel in the United States actively calling for a violent revolution against the US government and falsifying news, what do you think the US government would do? The exact same. PLUS, RCTV can still be viewed on cable television.

It also is in ''no way'' the only anti-Chavez media source in the country, most media in the country are hostile to Chavez. [[User:Pallawish]]

:So sorry to hear that, Mr. Chavez. I bet you'd rather be like your pal over in North Korea, who has a media that praises and worships him! '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 14:12, 29 November 2007 (EST)

==NOT A DICTATOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!==
CHAVEZ WAS ELECTED WITH TWO THIRDS OF THE VOTE, HOW CAN YOU CALL HIM A DICTATOR. YOUR PRESIDENT WAS ELECTED WITH LESS THAT HALF THE VOTE. --[[User:ChavezFan|ChavezFan]] 16:24, 29 October 2007 (EDT)
:Two thirds? Wow, Hitler beat him with 92% & Saddam got 99%. Looks like Chavez still has his work cut out for him. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:18, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

::Perhaps ChavezFan would like to go down to Venezuela right now and begin his own newspaper with the expressed purpose of being critical of the government in general, and Chavez in particular. Let's see how long it lasts. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:33, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

:What is this Chavestite doing in America????? '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 14:08, 29 November 2007 (EST)

== Pro-Chavez ==

I don't care how Chavez was sworn in, he can certainly become a dictator in office! I, frankly, am appalled at all those on here who love this man. If you love this man you must be a chavestite yourself or went to a ultra-pro-Chavez Venezuelan school. If so, you have a lot of surprises waiting for you! This article isn't even listing the things he said about Bush, like calling him "the devil". If he thinks Bush is the devil, why isn't he following him?? '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 14:22, 29 November 2007 (EST)

== Dictator ==

I want to agree with the views expressed above. I am by no means a fan of Chavez; he is a manipulative, power-hungry, buffoonish demagogue who may yet drive his country into the ground and is stripping away his citizens' freedom. But he is absolutely ''not'' a dictator. A dictator has total or near-total control of the government; Chavez, whatever he may wish, is still heavily hamstrung by the apparatus of Venezuela's democracy. He has had to refer many of his measures to the voters, and was recently handed a defeat which he could do nothing about. You can call him a dictator-wannabe or repressive, but it ill-serves the credibility of Conservapedia to say he is something he is not. [[User:Tor|Tor]] 16:53, 2 March 2008 (EST)
:Thank You Tor to are completely correct on this one. You know I am beginning to have my doubts about whether this website is being edited in good faith. Chavez is not perfect, and has done a lot of things to harm his country's economy and its people but a dictater? Well that's nonsense and for our encyclopedia to say so because we dislike his economic and social positions, well that's nonsense on stilts.--[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 08:59, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Anyone here heard the Simon Bolivar Youth Orchestra? No? I thought not. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 22:54, 12 August 2008 (EDT)

=="Silencing" the Media==
''"In May 2007, Chavez silenced the only remaining opposition television station critical of his repression by revoking its licence."''
This claim has more problems than the "non-American spelling," which has caused Conservapedia to be critical of Wikipedia in the past. It is outright disingenuous to claim that Chavez "silenced" RCTV because they were "critical of his repression." RCTV's license was simply not renewed; it was not "revoked." And the reason that it was not renewed is because five years prior, RCTV had openly endorsed the overthrow of the democratically elected President Chavez. If a news outlet in the U.S. had openly called for the overthrow of Bush, and Bush was temporarily removed from power, it's likely that the persons responsible would be imprisoned and charged with treason, not have their license not renewed five years after the fact. --[[User:Agnapostate|Agnapostate]] 21:28, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
:Well, given that nobody here has expressed any opposition to this, I'm editing the media claim. --[[User:Agnapostate|Agnapostate]] 21:25, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Hugo Chavez