What exactly is there to debate?
This is the same dramatization by hollywood types that put Obama in office.
Are you saying that these south american nations are not run by dictators because Oliver Stone makes a warm video showing these guys looking out for the folks? Look at the stats in these nations rather than watching these silly films, numbers dont lie. And to ignore these stats does nothing for the people or a nation as a whole.
Let me guess, youve been educated our current health care system by watching Michael Moores "sicko" film?
So Chavez is not silencing the media? Chavez IS creating wealth? Chavez is not overtaking private industry? What exactly are we getting wrong? And keep in mind that not even Obama has a use for this guy and theres something loud and clear to be said about that.
The movies isn't just about Chavez and I believe that was made pretty clear in the first post, read the list of people interviewed. It's a documentary which is simply Oliver Stone interviewing various leaders of these countries.
I won't dispute that Chavez doesn't have the best relationship with some media in his country. Interestingly enough it's the private media, similar to the Murdoch empire, that he doesn't like. Similarly to the US 80% of the media is private and controlled by the oligarchy. They were the ruling class for years.
Chavez is overtaking private industry and he is creating wealth. In Venezuela's extreme poverty and poverty rates have dropped amazingly during his tenure. He is constantly re-elected in landslides and while he is the only one running he's not preventing anyone from running against him. In fact the female President of Argentina made the comment while being interviewed that Chavez should encourage additional candidates so as to stop the rumors that he is a dictator.
Chavez's biggest problems were with the US Treasury and IMF (International Monetary Fund) that basically wanted to run South American countries via financial means. He was the first leader in South America to reject their policies, pay off the debt owed, and then throw them out. The other countries that have followed have done very well.
One of the big reasons that these countries are vilified is because of their rejection of US control. Why shouldn't they be allowed to do things on their own in their own way? If socialism works for them why not let them do it? If socialism is so paid and must be eradicated why aren't we gearing up to go after other socialist countries in Europe?
