Slashdot Mirror


"Violent" Video Games To Be Banned In Venezuela

An anonymous reader writes "The country that has bought Sukhois, tanks and 100,000 AK-103's, is planning to build a manufacturing plant of Russian rifles, and oppresses peaceful marches has decided to ban 'violent' video games because they 'promote violence and can alter the behavior of children.' The new legislation in Venezuela says, 'The violence found in video games is translated into the real world.' This new law affects people who sell, 'use,' produce, import and distribute these games. Video games as a whole have been labeled as 'a consequence of savage capitalism' by PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela), which is the political party led by Hugo Chavez. Days before this law was approved by the National Assembly, Chavez promoted the use of traditional toys like the Yo-Yo and Trompo, and suggested that electronic toys like 'the Nintendo' be put aside because they promote 'egoism, individualism and violence.' Just today the AFP released a report showing Caracas as the second most violent city on the planet — even more violent than Baghdad. I guess all those violent gangs in Venezuela are addicted to video games."

420 comments

  1. Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Individualism? Oh, no!

    1. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by FourthAge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A socialist country passes a law that curtails individual liberty for the greater good?

      Oh my God how did this happen! The Left are the good guys aren't they? Clearly Chavez has become right-wing.

      --
      The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
    2. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Millennium · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Any sufficiently far-left philosophy is indistinguishable from a far-right philosophy.
      The reverse is also true.

    3. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Damn I had mod points today, and I blew them all on stupid Linux jokes earlier today. +1 Insightful

    4. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Dragonslicer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Any sufficiently authoritarian government acting in the name of socialism is indistinguishable from an equally authoritarian government acting in the name of capitalism. Trying to eliminate individualism and personal liberty is the mark of authoritarianism, not socialism.

    5. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Toonol · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not quite a catchy as the GP, but probably more accurate. I'd also throw in that in a sufficiently free society, the capitalistic/socialist tendencies of the government become irrelevant.

    6. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, it's like a circle then?

    7. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just wondering ...

      How exactly does one promote "capitalism" as in the free and unfettered enterprise of individuals ... while eliminating individualism. That's a contradiction. How does the state "get out of the way" AND destroy personal liberty ?

      And how come all examples of what you say are all left-wing. The ONLY example of a truly oppressive "right-wing" government is ... (<tadaa>) the national socialist party of Germany.

      Oh wait I'm probably doing this wrong. Were they in favor of private enterprise ? Well ... no. Were they in favor of individualism ? Well of course not. Were they for or against massive government interference in the market ? Well they were FOR massive government interference. Say ... what exactly makes them right wing ? Well just about the only thing is the fact that they opposed the "true" left wing ... meaning bolsjevism.

      So what makes the nazi party right-wing is the fact that they were slightly more center than Stalin (or Chavez), you know in the way that Osama bin laden is more tolerant of non-muslims than the taliban.

      This is probably why all lefties are postmodernist. After all, if they are not entitled to "their" version of the truth, they must be very very bad people indeed.

    8. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by FourthAge · · Score: 1

      That's exactly correct, and Dragonslicer is also right about the scale between authoritarian and libertarian government, and how that scale is orthogonal to other aspects of policy.

      This probably only makes sense in Britain, but my post is inspired by the meme that if the socialists do anything bad, it must be because they've stopped being socialists and become "right wing". This allegedly happened to New Labour. The meme is stupid, firstly because it's wrong, and secondly because it associates moderately right wing people (such as myself) with all of the bad things that New Labour did.

      --
      The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
    9. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by caluml · · Score: 1

      Is that because they meet together at the darkside, round the back?

    10. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Desler · · Score: 2, Informative

      The ONLY example of a truly oppressive "right-wing" government is ... () the national socialist party of Germany.

      The Nazis were't socialist and neither was Hitler. And it's amusing that you try to equate them as being left-wing.

    11. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      I agree that left/right wing make no sense outside of economics, and that a separate scale is needed.

      Although I still think it's reasonable to say that Labour moved to the right - not because of their authoritarianism, but purely on economic issues (e.g., ending higher education grants and introducing tuition fees - for years previously, the concern was that the "right wing" Conservative Government were reducing grants, yet they never went as far as Labour here).

    12. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think an important point to look at is that both the far left and the far right believe they know the ideal arrangement of affairs. The further you are on either side, the more certain you are that you're right.

      If you get out far enough, you start to believe that you're justified to force what's "right" on everyone.

      I say both sides are for assholes. Be a human being. Take the time to understand other people. Seek compromise. You'll lose the certainty in your beliefs that comes with blind commitment to an ideal, but you'll gain humanity.

    13. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by FourthAge · · Score: 1

      It's very interesting to hear another explanation. I hadn't thought of that.

      Left vs right also has some meaning when discussing social policy. When I heard people saying "Labour moved to the right", this is what I assumed they were referring to, probably because the context was related to bad things that Labour had done in that realm (e.g. ASBOs, detention without trial, etc.). It gave me a weird sense of cognitive dissonance because such micromanaging of society is hardly "right wing".

      --
      The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
    14. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      No I explain where they were located in the "political spectrum" ... slightly more to the center of Stalin ... massively to the left of everyone else.

      Socialist theory was racist (look up "eugenics") for the better part of the 20th century.

      And as for the "right-wing" nature of nazis ... why don't I just let liberals themselves do the talking ?

      You see a certain ... extreme left ... newspaper berates European countries for not being as Nazi as Obama (I'm not kidding, read the article)

      More than any other country, Germany â" Nazi Germany â" then set out on a serious stimulus program. The government built up the military, expanded the autobahn, put up stadiums for the 1936 Berlin Olympics and built monuments to the Nazi Party across Munich and Berlin.

      The economic benefits of this vast works program never flowed to most workers, because fascism doesnâ(TM)t look kindly on collective bargaining. But Germany did escape the Great Depression faster than other countries. Corporate profits boomed, and unemployment sank (and not because of slave labor, which didnâ(TM)t become widespread until later). Harold James, an economic historian, says that the young liberal economists studying under John Maynard Keynes in the 1930s began to debate whether Hitler had solved unemployment.

      (note that all left-wing governments are diametrically opposed to independant unions, you see this in the Soviet union, nazi germany, and in today's Venezuela)

    15. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, it's just that socialism and communism are more often used as an excuse for authoritarianism than capitalism (not that both haven't had their time in the sun). It seems to be easier to sell sacrafice for the "common good" and hence socialism is scary in that way. Capitalism that leads to an authoritarian oligarchy is no less scary but much rarer.

    16. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by nidarus · · Score: 1

      Not quite a catchy as the GP, but probably more accurate. I'd also throw in that in a sufficiently free society, the capitalistic/socialist tendencies of the government become irrelevant.

      I don't see how that's possible. If the government tries to protect consumers and workers, then it has socialist tendencies, if it doesn't, it has capitalist (albeit a certain kind of capitalist) tendencies.

      Or are you're talking about a society where everyone is infinitely moral, compassionate and rational, so no government is needed at all?

    17. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      You're quite right. The real culprit is blind acceptance of ideology, whatever that ideology is. Once people surrender any capacity to critically evaluate even their own ideologies, we enter the realm of tyranny.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    18. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by timeOday · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Individualism? Oh, no!

      Remember, that's a translation of what Chavez said, rather than what he actually said. From the context, I wouldn't be surprised if the word he actually used has negative connotations similar to "loner," "isolation," and "exile" have to us.

    19. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Zombywuf · · Score: 1

      Given Western reporting on Chavez, I'd suspect he said nothing of the sort. You know, like when he was ousted in a coup and restored to power through popular support, reports in the US and UK were that Chavez was oppressing peaceful protest.

      --
      If you can read this you've gone too far.
    20. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Draek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How exactly does one promote "capitalism" as in the free and unfettered enterprise of individuals ... while eliminating individualism. That's a contradiction. How does the state "get out of the way" AND destroy personal liberty ?

      Take a look at the US and see how they do it. By granting enterpreneurs the ability to screw everybody else for their own gain (see: copyright, patents), they manage to both incentive the free enterprise of individuals *and* destroy personal liberties. Take it just a bit farther and you get corporatism first, then fascism, two extreme right-wing philosophies which you somehow missed in your effort to Godwin the discussion.

      Now, I'm a right-wing capitalist, what in the US would be called a "libertarian" I believe, but seriously: stop pretending only one side of the political spectrum holds a monopoly over stupidity, you aren't helping your own credibility by doing so.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    21. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Zumbs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just wondering ...

      How exactly does one promote "capitalism" as in the free and unfettered enterprise of individuals ... while eliminating individualism.

      I suppose that you never heard of Augusto Pinochét? On September 11th 1973 he lead a bloody coup against the elected government of Chile and started a bloody oppression of the Chilean people while liberalising trade to allow the rich and powerful to become even more rich and powerful. At the time he got a lot of support by famous monetarists, such as Milton Friedman, who conveniently ignored his atrocities.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    22. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Arcane_Rhino · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nice rational post. The imbecility of the people who demand that the Nazis (aka. the National Socialist German Workers' Party) weren't socialists because, well... the Nazis were bad and socialism is good just drives me crazy.

    23. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Toonol · · Score: 1

      Nope. In a free society, people are free to be as immoral as they want, as long as they don't infringe upon somebody else's rights. I'm saying that a government that has no power other than to protect human rights, but that does a good job protecting human rights, has no 'favors' to sell to corporations (the excesses of capitalism), and no means of seizing property for 'the state' (the excesses of socialism). The biggest reason our senators and executives are corrupt is because we've foolishly let them have more and more power to be corrupt WITH.

      Personally, my belief is that a system of government that gives maximum freedom, while protecting basic human rights (life, property, speech, etc.), will inevitably lead to capitalism, because that's the economic structure that is inherent in free choice. However, that's a side effect. A government in a truly free country couldn't nationalize an industry if they wanted to, nor stop people from sharing their wealth.

    24. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by nidarus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nope. In a free society, people are free to be as immoral as they want, as long as they don't infringe upon somebody else's rights

      Does not compute.

      I'm saying that a government that has no power other than to protect human rights, but that does a good job protecting human rights

      Define human rights. If you say "not being fucked over by the megacorps" and "managing to live a decent life even if you're poor", then you're a socialist. If you say "not having the government meddle with my business" and "not having to pay most of my hard-earned paycheck to support those who didn't earn it" then you're a capitalist (of a certain kind).

      There are more answers for Fascism, Communism, Theocracy, Monarchy, etc.

      [...] has no 'favors' to sell to corporations (the excesses of capitalism), and no means of seizing property for 'the state' (the excesses of socialism). The biggest reason our senators and executives are corrupt is because we've foolishly let them have more and more power to be corrupt WITH.

      It seems to me you're making a case against corruption, and I agree - corruption is bad. But if you're implying that any kind of taxes (if that's what you mean by seizing property), or pro-business laws (like the existence of corporations, intellectual property, trade secrets and so forth) are inherently wrong, I disagree. Basically, I can't see a prosperous country existing without those.

      Personally, my belief is that a system of government that gives maximum freedom, while protecting basic human rights (life, property, speech, etc.), will inevitably lead to capitalism, because that's the economic structure that is inherent in free choice

      Kinda depends on what you mean by capitalism. If you mean a well-regulated free market economy that's not owned by special interest groups, I agree.

    25. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by mi · · Score: 1

      Any sufficiently far-left philosophy is indistinguishable from a far-right philosophy.

      No, darling. This is not going to cut it... A catchy sound-bite still requires substantiation... Where is yours? Which "far-right" regime do you find "indistinguishable" from or even really similar to from Chavez' far left, for example?

      Who is, in your opinion, the far right philosopher, who advocates ideas "indistinguishable" from Chavez'?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    26. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any sufficiently nested comment is indistinguishable from an unexisting comment.

    27. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by michaelmuffin · · Score: 1

      The economic benefits of this vast works program never flowed to most workers,

      now why exactly do you consider this nazi policy to be socialist? it is the aim of a socialist economic policy after all to benefit the society's workers. someone who feels that policy need not benefit the people can hardly be called a socialist

    28. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Here is how it works. It really has nothing to do with socialism or capitalism. It is all about a handful of individuals who gain power and seek to keep it. Technically all those systems whether fascist, stalinist, theocracy and monarchy are really outside of the political scale in terms of democratic principles and have simple shifted to an authoritarian police state, where extreme violence is used to enforce the demands of the handful at the top and to keep them in power (they are not about the people but about the handful of individuals at the top, psychopaths and the government simply reflects their own personality defects.

      In socialist terms, is can only ever be a government of the people, by the people and for the people, once it shifts from that it is no longer socialists it is simply branding as an exercise in marketing. Now on the right, the capitalist side, it can never be a government of the people by the people and for the people, again they are simply using marketing tactics, your free of government control but are completely subject to the control of the rich, because it is a government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich. In reality of course the 'er' private rich are now the government, so you are actually subject to government control, there are just a bunch of 'actors' who pretend to be your government who stand between you and any actual role you have governing your society. So big socialist government has to be big because it has to incorporate all the people in way or another in actual governance and, small authoritarian government is small because the majority people are specifically excluded from any form of governance and it only needs to cater to the wishes of a handful of sociopaths, who are simply driven by their own personal, lusts, greed and ego and the government reflects that.

      In human terms, the nation should be an extension of the community, which is an extension of the neighbourhood, which is an extension of the family and, should reflect the same sense of caring and sharing otherwise it becomes inhumane as defined by normal human behaviour. So the greater the shift away from that, implicitly the greater is the shift of the leaders and enforcers from normal human psychology and their behaviour reflects their abnormal sociopathic tendencies. They don't care or share because mentally they are incapable of doing, so it is the 'rich and greedy' (religion, politics or wealth as the measure) and what ever political charade and masquerade they are currently running to screw everyone else.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    29. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Capitalism and Communism are different economic models. Either could be authoritarian in nature. As for conservatism and liberalism, one could also argue that liberalism is the support of freedom of will. For instance, I find it is typically conservative individuals who support laws that lead to no victim crime and such. Perhaps my data is not quite complete, though.

    30. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      The ONLY example of a truly oppressive "right-wing" government is ... () the national socialist party of Germany.

      So, please tell us which party Islamic theocracy is to the left of, or is being executed for not believing in the right flavor of God not oppressive to you?

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    31. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by michaelmuffin · · Score: 1

      The ONLY example of a truly oppressive "right-wing" government is ... () the national socialist party of Germany.

      The Nazis were't socialist and neither was Hitler. And it's amusing that you try to equate them as being left-wing.

      don't you get it? national socialist. just like the people's republic of china represents the people. and how the american democratic party believes in democracy. and the south korean democratic justice party pursued justice thru democracy. you just don't get it do you? you can tell everything about a political party and its policies by its name

    32. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US we do it by pretending Fascism == Capitalism.

      I think we need a new word for capitalism. Too loaded of a word.

    33. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      El indeviduo es el mayor reto al rejimen de este dictador! No se deberia parar, sino fomentar!! - The Individual is the greatest threat to this regime. It shouldn't be stopped, but fomented!

    34. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What people's rights are, are derived from one's morals, metaphysics and ideology. Some people believe that the right to, for example, move freely is more important than property rights. Some believe that beaches can be owned, some can't. Some also believe that children belong to their parents, others don't.

      If everyone shared a consistent view of what "rights" were, then there wouldn't be a problem. But any political theory that relies on a non-existent consensus and an equally non-existent standard of human behavior is pretty useless.

    35. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      How exactly does one promote "capitalism" as in the free and unfettered enterprise of individuals ... while eliminating individualism. That's a contradiction. How does the state "get out of the way" AND destroy personal liberty ?

      Capitalism is not necessarily about the free enterprise of individuals. If you look at China now are capitalist in the sense that they allowed private companies. In fact China's economic growth comes from the private sector - the state companies are only kept alive for legacy reasons.

      Still it's very much not about individualism - the whole spiel of the Chinese "Communist" party is that Chinese people need to sacrifice individual freedoms now to make China a great country. The Communist era system of repression is still very much in place, but rather than repressing evil capitalists it's actually used to supress criticism of the government by ordinary people. Most of the rich people have serious poltical connections to the point that crticism of them is criticism of the government because the rich capitalists and the government are actually the same people.

      The Roman Republic was also like this - the Senate was run by very rich people and there wasn't so much a state to speak or - even the armies were paid for by individuals. Wars generated slaves to pay off the soldiers man the estates of the plutocratic scum that dominated the Senate. Now the Roman Republic turned into an Empire and the Emperors had the power to confiscate the assets of their enemies. During the empire, even free workers were gradually turned into serfs as their right to leave their estate was gradually restricted. Of course a society which is 90% serfs and slaves working in agriculture has a serious tendency to stagnate and it did. Still such a system is unfortunately very stable - even after the Roman Empire fell the social system stayed in place for over a thousand years.

      Of course collectivisation in the Soviet Union had much the same effect - the workers ended up forced into serfdom on a collective farm run by people who also controlled the army, the press, the secret police and the legal system.

      Actually from what I've read the Nazis would have set up something similar - politically well connected and very rich people would have had factories and estates that run mostly on slave labour. The SS ended up owning a lot of companies, and older industrial giants were quite happy to join in the system. My guess is that the rights of even nominally free German workers would have slowly eroded over the centuries too and a similar process of stagnation would have set in.

      Now the Nazis and Russian and Chinese Communist Party claimed to varying degrees to be Socialist. Still, objectively, neither of them were anything like Socialists or Social Democrats in democratic countries which were grass roots movements campaigning for more rights for workers and less power for bosses. Actually in the long run they were all movements that give bosses absolute power and reduce the workers to serfdom. It would be more accurate to call them Feudalist parties than Socialist ones.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    36. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      By that standard the Soviets weren't socialists either. Neither were the Bolsjeviks, nor was Mao, nor Chavez or Kim Jong Il.

      Hitler's stated purpose was to improve the lives of the German laborer, who was being ruthlessly exploited by capitalists.

      Of course, all were doing this thing called "socialist revolution" and all were implementing central control of the economy. There were doing it in the name of improving "society's worker's" lives (well the "worthy ones" at least, after all they mostly destroyed the lives of "capitalists", "workers", or Jews for that matter. Both Soviets and Nazi's comitted a holocaust against Jews and actually the Soviets killed more of them).

      That is 20th century socialism. That is why lefties need their own version of the truth.

    37. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please stop promoting this nonsense. Put away your Naomi Klein book and read up on the "support" Pinochet had by Friedman. Also please stop conveniently ignoring that the Allende was as proto-fascist as Pinochet was.

    38. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by ZeRu · · Score: 1

      Clearly people wo are praising marxist ideas don't care about atrocities committed by Stalin, Ceausescau, Pol Pot and all other communist dictators. They would say that communist ideology was good in theory, but the same could be said about religion, even though such people openly despise religion, showing their double standards. Comments on sites like digg are filled with hatred towards right-wingers and conservatives (usually coming from Americans), but if such people were from eastern europe (as I am) they would hate communism and collectivism even more.

      --
      If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
    39. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      That's so common amongst liberals. They are supposedly pro-freedom. But if anyone were to dislodge Chavez, oh dear God, you'd hear the screams 2 states away from the DNC.

      In reality, at the very least the actions of liberals are not pro-freedom. Then again the "nazi"'s full name ends with "party of the people", as did the full name of the soviet party.

      Leftist names are just camouflage.

    40. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by michaelmuffin · · Score: 1

      Hitler's stated purpose was to improve the lives of the German laborer, who was being ruthlessly exploited by capitalists.

      hitler's stated purpose was also to bring peace to europe. whether he genuinely thought that conquerorring europe would bring peace is debatable i suppose, but a europe unified under hitler isn't what most would call peace

    41. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by tenco · · Score: 3, Informative

      More than any other country, Germany â" Nazi Germany â" then set out on a serious stimulus program. The government built up the military, expanded the autobahn, put up stadiums for the 1936 Berlin Olympics and built monuments to the Nazi Party across Munich and Berlin.

      The economic benefits of this vast works program never flowed to most workers, because fascism doesn't look kindly on collective bargaining. But Germany did escape the Great Depression faster than other countries. Corporate profits boomed, and unemployment sank (and not because of slave labor, which didn't become widespread until later). Harold James, an economic historian, says that the young liberal economists studying under John Maynard Keynes in the 1930s began to debate whether Hitler had solved unemployment.

      I emphasized the important parts bold. The part in italics isn't true. The autobahn was mainly built with forced labor. That's why unemployment sank. Corporate profits boomed (later on) because of slave labor and war (see IG Farben for example).

      You may also notice, that socialism != stalinism. You may also find this interesting.

    42. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      [In] a society where everyone is infinitely moral, compassionate and rational, [...] no government is needed at all[.]

      This political realization is probably the single most fundamental one to be had when converting from "wishful" to "applicable".

      People keep telling me that socialism would work perfectly, if only the people weren't so flawed. Then there's those that are convinced full-on laissez-faire capitalism is the solution, provided the people are ready for it.

      With a perfect people, the system of government becomes close to irrelevant.

      In the same vein, I find it noteworthy how both sides claim their perfect government has never been implemented yet, so you can't really say if it would work. I hear this both from LF capitalists ("true capitalism has never been tried, we came close in the foundation years of the States, though") and socialists/communists ("true communism can only work if the whole world is in on it"). Realistically now, both these systems will never be tried. They're ideologies.You can't make them true if you don't have complete, 100.00%, approval of every single living body. In any other case, they will be exploited, because they can be exploited.

      Of course, this is true of every political system there ever was or will be, unless, see above, people are perfect. In any other world, you're stuck with politics.

    43. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by doug141 · · Score: 1

      The US has strong consumer protection laws, and everybody has the right to sue.

    44. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by sp3d2orbit · · Score: 1

      You deserve a +5 Insightful.

      A charismatic leader with grass roots support, elected by a landslide, purporting to protect the needs of the poor from the greed of the rich turns out to be only interested in power. Thank god that could never happen in the US.

    45. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by DerWulf · · Score: 1

      of course Hitler was a socialist ... he prefered to call it the "volkswohl" though. Don't let yourself be blinded by the Nazis own propaganda, please.

      --

      ___
      No power in the 'verse can stop me
    46. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by sp3d2orbit · · Score: 1

      I have no political affiliation. But when people from the "left" speak, this is what I hear:

      "My house got foreclosed because the evil bankers tricked me with clever math."
      "I am overweight because the evil fast food corporations tricked me into eating trans-fats and french fries."
      "I can't get my diabetes and heart disease treated because the evil medical system and insurance companies are evil."
      "I can't find a job because the evil illegal immigrants Mexicans took them all."
      "I can't think for myself because the evil media tricks and scares me into believing whatever they want.
      When will society give me what it owes me?"
      "People who have a lot of money got there by being evil."

      On the surface I like some of the ideas from the left. I like the environment. I like freedom of choice. But I don't like that the left idealizes the worst elements in our society. Laziness, obesity, and stupidity are treatable conditions and society should not be held hostage by those who lack personal accountability and responsibility.

    47. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by smithmc · · Score: 1

      Any sufficiently authoritarian government acting in the name of socialism is indistinguishable from an equally authoritarian government acting in the name of capitalism. Trying to eliminate individualism and personal liberty is the mark of authoritarianism, not socialism.

      Socialism is a form of authoritarianism, isn't it? Socialism is the ownership/control of capital by the state, isn't it? How can that not entail increased authority on the part of the government?

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    48. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Kilobug · · Score: 1

      That's complete non-sense. Some people, like Stalin, used a leftist ideology as a cover from their dictatorship - but calling yourself something doesn't make you one, or Saddam was an elected president, and East Germany was democratic.

      Left-wing ideology is about sharing, cooperation, helping the ones in need, and giving the tools to people so they can be actually free to do whatever doesn't harm anyone. Right-wing ideology is about selfishness, competition (also known as law of jungle), survival of fittest, and giving the tools to the powerful so they can oppress the weak.

      Both are totally, completely opposite, and claiming they are the same is confusing what an ideology is, and what was made by some in name of it. And if you do that, all ideologies, from democracy to liberalism to christianism to individualism to charity are the same and horrible, because you'll have always someone who did horrible things in the name of each.

    49. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Kilobug · · Score: 1

      Individualism is not personal liberty. Individualism is an ideology that says that only yourself matters, not the others. It's a disgusting ideology, that no one except sociopaths are really following. A sane human being isn't individualistic, but cares about himself AND others, his family, his friends, and also the other people making the society.

      Personal liberty is the right to do anything that doesn't harm others. And personal liberty, to not be an empty word, but a real liberty, requires collective, social rights. If you don't know how to read, your freedom of reading is useless. If you don't have food to eat, any other freedom becomes meaningless.

      As ChÃvez doesn't try to eliminate personal liberty. When he teaches people how to read (thanks to ChÃvez, Venezuela is now "free of illiteracy", recognized so by UNESCO), he's allowing them to use the freedom to read.

      And the ChÃvez government is definitely not an oppressive one. There is much more freedom in Venezuela now than it ever has been before. It was only 20 years ago that during the Caracazo, the previous "democracy" government sent the army to repress protest, killing between 300 and 3000 depending of sources.

      ChÃvez even didn't send anyone to jail after a military coup attempt ! He's definitely not an oppressive leader. If the opposition would do a third of what it does in Venezuela in USA or anywhere in Europe, people would go in jail. In Venezuela, they don't.

    50. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Trying to eliminate individualism and personal liberty is the mark of authoritarianism, not socialism.

      Socialism on any large scale (i.e. a nation) must necessarily involve elimination or at least curtailment of personal liberty by definition because many people would choose not to cooperate if given the choice. If it involves coercion, and socialism always involves coercion at least in some form and to some degree, then it is the opposite of liberty. For a more thorough rebuttal of socialism != liberty might I suggest The Road to Serfdom (dedicated to socialists everywhere) by Frederick Von Hayek? If you still want to defend socialism then fine, but at least be honest and admit the socialism is against freedom (the usual response from socialists is that freedom is not inherently more valuable than other things, a point which I disagree with, but at least an honest, if misguided, position).

    51. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. In a free society, people are free to be as immoral as they want, as long as they don't infringe upon somebody else's rights. I'm saying that a government that has no power other than to protect human rights, but that does a good job protecting human rights, has no 'favors' to sell to corporations (the excesses of capitalism), and no means of seizing property for 'the state' (the excesses of socialism).

      Only guaranteeing non-interference between people leads quickly to apathy of the suffering of others and then altruism disappears altogether. Once altruism is gone from society, the weak (Sick, poor, Etc...) fall to the side through the inaction of those that have power/money/health. While this would kick-start natural selection, it may not be good for it to happen this way.

    52. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      capitalism on any large scale (i.e. a nation) must necessarily involve elimination or at least curtailment of personal liberty by definition because many people would choose not to cooperate if given the choice. If it involves coercion, and capitalism always involves coercion at least in some form and to some degree, then it is the opposite of liberty. For a more thorough rebuttal of capitalism != liberty might I suggest reading a history book. If you still want to defend capitalism then fine, but at least be honest and admit capitalism is against freedom (the usual response from capitalists is that freedom is not inherently more valuable than other things, a point which I disagree with, but at least an honest, if misguided, position).

    53. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by LionMage · · Score: 1

      The National Socialists weren't true socialists -- not because "Nazis are bad and socialism is good," but because the NSDAP needed the support of the trade unions and other traditional socialist strongholds to gain power. In other words, they cloaked themselves in socialist badging and language until such time as their agenda no longer required the support of the people they had duped. That, and they coopted an existing political party, the German Workers Party, to do what they wanted.

      (As an aside, I noticed the Wikipedia article about the NSDAP has an error in the German text -- they give the party name as "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei," but the final word should be "Arbeiterspartei." Probably a small bit of nit-picking, but I remembered enough from German class in high school to know it didn't "sound" right to me. Annoying because Google will try to correct you to "Arbeiterpartei" when searching, no doubt based on the Wikipedia article.)

    54. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      Oh the old "communism is perfect, it's just never been tried correctly argument". You'd think people would stop parotting themselves after being proven wrong sometimes.

      But never underestimate human stupidity. What better definition of stupidity exists than "if something fails, try it again expecting different results" ?

      yes socialism was the ideal. Stalinism, nazism, north korea, venezuela, ... are the real world results.

    55. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by tenco · · Score: 1

      If I read your argument right, you think that the social revolution in catalonia would have turned into stalinism later on. Interesting. Can you explain why?

    56. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. Lots of things have happened to socialist revolutions. Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Mao, and Hitler are a few examples, but there are lots. What has never resulted though, is a stable, just society.

      Or even an existant, lasting society, for that matter. One that's even vaguely like the socialist ideal ... never happened.

      Ironically capitalist revolutions, which have also happened did, in general (though not always) bring that society a lot closer to the socialist ideal.

      I don't mean to imply that those capitalist society had everlasting life either.

  2. banning make hulk smash! by jollyreaper · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe banning violence would help to cut down on the violence in that country.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You outlaw violence and only outlaws will be violent

      -sid216

    2. Re:banning make hulk smash! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's easy - you just have to kill all the violent people.

    3. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Red4man · · Score: 1, Insightful

      But being a violent, murderous asshole is fine if you're a lefty. Just ask any fucking hipster in a 'Che' shirt.

      --
      Sock Puppets: damn_registrars=pudge_confirmer=jimmy_slimmy=raiigunner=cml4524=a_klavan=red4men=ronpaulisanidiot
    4. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1, Troll

      But being a violent, murderous asshole is fine if you're a lefty. Just ask any fucking hipster in a 'Che' shirt.

      Mod parent up!

      Although, to be fair, being a violent murderous asshole is even better of you're a righty. You get to defer the assassination and go straight to the presidential palace.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    5. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Red4man · · Score: 2, Funny

      Although, to be fair, being a violent murderous asshole is even better of you're a righty.
      Yes, but your reason is wrong. It's better 'cause you get to send in the military, and leave the dirty work for the hired help.

      --
      Sock Puppets: damn_registrars=pudge_confirmer=jimmy_slimmy=raiigunner=cml4524=a_klavan=red4men=ronpaulisanidiot
    6. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well...yeah! But we only kill bad people.

    7. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      You're taking my cockblocking better than I thought you would. New levels of maturity for ol' Red...

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    8. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Red4man · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Yeah, I'm in a good mood. Amazing what a threesome will do for a guy.

      Trust me: If you ever get a chance to get two chicks - TAKE IT.

      --
      Sock Puppets: damn_registrars=pudge_confirmer=jimmy_slimmy=raiigunner=cml4524=a_klavan=red4men=ronpaulisanidiot
    9. Re:banning make hulk smash! by stephanruby · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I can't believe that people are still calling the CIA-led April 11th, 2002 march against the palace -- a "peaceful march".

    10. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Firehed · · Score: 1

      You outlaw wooshing and only outlaws will fail to get the joke

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    11. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    12. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But being a violent, murderous asshole is fine if you're a lefty. Just ask any fucking hipster in a 'Che' shirt.

      Y'know, I'd complain that the hipsters get to do all the fucking while us hardworking types don't get any, but if they still have the focus to be a murderous asshole while doing so, well, dang, man. Even James Bond has to separate the fucking from the killing. That takes skill I do not have. I tip my hat to 'em.

    13. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I like Americans and have seen more of the place than most natives, but your government is evil. For a true account of recent Venezuelan history please watch the video link I give with this comment. This amazing fly on the wall documentary was made by an Irish TV crew that happened to be in the presidential palace at the time of the American backed coup and filmed it for future folks to see the truth.

        http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144

      The most dangerous form of violence Venezuela faces is from the USA. History shows how many have died on this earth due to the policies of the US military, political, and industrial hegemony.

      Mark Wood. Shropshire. England.

    14. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. They will simply ban Venezuela itself, and be done with it. :P

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    15. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alright! Mom AND daughter, huh?

    16. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Red4man · · Score: 1

      Nope - even better. Two sisters.

      --
      Sock Puppets: damn_registrars=pudge_confirmer=jimmy_slimmy=raiigunner=cml4524=a_klavan=red4men=ronpaulisanidiot
    17. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Red4man · · Score: 1

      Oh look at that. Some loser hit us both with a troll mod. I'm.. I'm crushed. I'm devastated. I might just have to go home and kiss a shotgun like Kurt Cobain did.

      --
      Sock Puppets: damn_registrars=pudge_confirmer=jimmy_slimmy=raiigunner=cml4524=a_klavan=red4men=ronpaulisanidiot
    18. Re:banning make hulk smash! by kheldan · · Score: 1

      No, more likely they don't want kids learning combat tactics and techniques from video games, so they won't be effective in the coming revolution.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    19. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're banning Video games but anyone can carry a gun, even small kids... (not by law, but they let them anyways)

    20. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      This amazing fly on the wall documentary was made by an Irish TV crew that happened to be in the presidential palace at the time of the American backed coup and filmed it for future folks to see the truth.

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144

      That "documentary" was debunked. Don't let your anti-Americanism blind you to the truth.

      The most dangerous form of violence Venezuela faces is from the USA. History shows how many have died on this earth due to the policies of the US military, political, and industrial hegemony.

      My bad, I should have said reality instead of truth.

    21. Re:banning make hulk smash! by arielCo · · Score: 0

      The OP means several other, later demonstrations that have been quelled rather nastily. First listen to him publicly ordering his defense and interior ministers to "gas them with the good stuff", take a look at this. Allegedly a few demonstrators started by throwing rocks and bottles at the cops, but there's not a single video of what happened before the gas canisters and rubber bullets flew (sadly, the camera from the official TV station looked away from the frontline just when it's supposed to have happened).

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
    22. Re:banning make hulk smash! by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      No, more likely they don't want kids learning combat tactics and techniques from video games, so they won't be effective in the coming revolution.

      Yes, I heard that there's a Leeroy Jenkins School of Tactical Assault that is becoming very popular. It's amazing what you can learn in video games.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    23. Re:banning make hulk smash! by adam.ec · · Score: 1
      Yes, can agree with you on this one Mark. And I would like to add my own bit.

      As a British national living in Latin America I regularly check web sites like BBC news to keep myself up-to-date with what is happening back in the UK. It is amazing to see how media in other countries interpret situations and then how they report them to the awaiting public. Of course, it works the other way round too with media organisations manipulating the same reports back to their own people. But, when you are actually involved with some of these situations, and then you see the misguided/misunderstood/spin manipulated or whatever reports in other countries about the said situation you realise just how much bullshit there really is in this world and it is so hard to gain even 20% of the real truth.

      As for this story, my brother-in-law (10 years old) is obsessed with violent games on his PS2. He tries to play real fighting games with my 2 and 6 year old daughters. I've had to ban him from the computer now because of downloading violent online games which usually come with a bunch of porn adverts down both sides of the screen. What is worse, is that you have to understand the pirate industry in Latin America too...... Trying to buy legitimate computer games in my city is impossible. Within three blocks of my home there are 16 stores selling pirate games - 80% of them violence related. I can understand the idea of blocking violent games though I don't think it will actually be as effective as it needs to be. You may pick on Chavez and his non-westernised views but these countries have got to start somewhere to curb the violence. If Chavez throws a few tens of thousands of troops on to the streets to deal with violence you will hear about it in ways that portray him as a military dictator. So what does the guy do?

    24. Re:banning make hulk smash! by ZoCool · · Score: 1

      Maybe banning violence would help to cut down on the violence in that country.

      Mmmm

      From the originating (1) report: "Caracas has 96 murders per 100,000 inhabitants, and New Orleans registers 95 my emphasis, said the Mexican non-governmental organization, which based its figures on media reports and an FBI report for the United States"

      Fastinating how the CNA* herd charge all over reality.#

      * CNA = Central North America

      # Actually; depressing. I so understand various non-CNA people's anger towards them.

  3. Ah I get it... by Mashiki · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Crush the thought of dissent before they spill out into the streets. Actually shouldn't be promoting the use of violent video games to keep his citizens under control?

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
    1. Re:Ah I get it... by b4upoo · · Score: 1

      Venezuela has always had unusual problems due to the days when Spain established land barons and left large numbers living in dire poverty. Chavez may be doing things that actually need doing in order to establish society across all elements in the population. This is an area where ministers, priests and nuns have often been killed as the right wing considers Christianity as a tool of communism. Even though governmental policies there may seem strange or even offensive to us perhaps Chavez is a real boon to his nation.

    2. Re:Ah I get it... by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Actually shouldn't be promoting the use of violent video games to keep his citizens under control?

      That's exactly the problem. How do you overthrow the current corrupt regime and install a new corrupt regime when everybody is at home glued to the X-Box? Instead of going outside, picking up a weapon, and joining forces with a local drug lord, these kids will have worked out all their aggression on the video screen.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  4. Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Tekfactory · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Chavez promoted the use of traditional toys like the Yo-Yo and Trompo, and suggested that electronic toys like 'the Nintendo' be put aside because they promote 'egoism, individualism and violence.'

    Because we all know what a danger Individualism is.

    1. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Individualism interferes with your proper sense of duty to do whatever El Jefe tells you to.

    2. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      You must realize that Latin American countries are far more collectivist. Our notions of individual rights (which are eroding today even here in the USA) aren't as held there as they are here.

    3. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Entropius · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Does this mean that this collectivism should be enforced by law?

      European culture is more collectivist too, but the Europeans realize that this cultural trait doesn't need to be enshrined in law.

    4. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like crimes committed with strings are on the way up. Ban the sell of strings! Only stringless Yo-yo and Trompo from now on.

    5. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by hurfy · · Score: 1

      "Because we all know what a danger Individualism is."

      Certainly

      And the yo-yo and trompo are the perfect solution because they...err...ummm...ahhhh....well, nothing brings the community together like a good yo-yo.

      Perhaps the plan is to only allow one yo-yo and one top per 10 kids?

      (neither the spell-checker nor myself knew what trompo was without a little help)

    6. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Targen · · Score: 2, Informative

      If by "collectivist" you mean we can't resist taking by force that which belongs to others (especially if it belongs to everyone)? Yes, correct. Make no mistake, though; this is entirely and exclusively about corruption which is so prevalent in our society it's almost an axiom in venezuelan culture. Most of our history is entirely reigned by the comings and goings of power with the sole purpose of personal enrichment. Read around for the history of the CompañÃa Guipuzcoana for some early (colonial period) examples of this.

      Don't make the mistake of interpreting venezuelan "collectivism" as anything of the sort you find in many of Europe's successful societies.

    7. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Also, he never heard of multiplayer games and required teamwork, apparently...

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    8. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      To be fair, the trait definitely does affect the law - the very concept of tax-funded social welfare is subtly collectivist - but of course there's still a world of difference between that, and mandating altruism for everyone. Kinda like there's a difference between a theocracy, and a democracy where people consider religious issues important enough to vote on them.

    9. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Zombywuf · · Score: 1

      A democracy can easily be a theocracy. And there's nothing subtle about the collectivism of tax-funded social welfare. Nothing wrong with collectivism either. It's a survival trait first used by single celled organisms, to fish, to apes and finally to us. Rugged Individualism is tool to break human spirit and keep the plebs in their place.

      --
      If you can read this you've gone too far.
    10. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Draek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You must realize that Latin American countries are far more collectivist.

      No, we aren't. Don't generalize the whole population of Latin America based on what the Supreme Idiot of the Venezuelan Republic does or says.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    11. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Tailsfan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, so he's just as bad as jack Thompson. Also why pick on Nintendo. And what defines a "violent" game. OMG MARIO MAKES KIDS TRY TO JUMP ON TURTLES!!! (what you don't like my sarcasm)

    12. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      Yes, you are. Latin American countries, Asian countries, and African Countries tend to be more collectivist than Western countries are.

    13. Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because we all know what a danger Individualism is.

      The US is a shining example of what happens when individualism is promoted over the collective good so yeah, encourage greedy capitalists to continue making violent videos - they groom young men for what the US does best - wage war.

  5. Government Parenting by quatin · · Score: 1

    Those violent video games are bad for you kid! Stop playing them immediately or be flogged!

  6. Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by MikeRT · · Score: 1, Troll

    Chavez promoted the use of traditional toys like the Yo-Yo and Trompo, and suggested that electronic toys like 'the Nintendo' be put aside because they promote 'egoism, individualism and violence.'

    Says the Strong Man who has been undermining the constitutional order of Venezuela and dreams of creating a Castro-like cult of personality for himself.

    1. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by darthwader · · Score: 1

      It is not hypocritical at all (although it may be a bit ironic). A hallmark of civilization everywhere is the idea that the state, as embodied by the government, has a monopoly on violence. Only the state can use violence against someone. If a citizen has a disagreement with another citizen, they must bring that disagreement to the state (the police or courts), and if appropriate, the state will use violence to resolve it.

      It is perfectly normal and reasonable for a government to use violence for its own ends, and at the same time take measures to prevent its citizens from using violence for their ends.

      I'm not saying Chavez's use of violence is just, fair, or even sensible. I'm also not saying the idea of restricting video games is reasonable or likely to be effective in reducing violence. I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with Chavez' government attempting to reduce violence by citizens.

      In other words: the plan is stupid, but not hypocritical.

      --
      I hate it when I make a joke and I get modded "+5 insightful". Mod the stupid comments "funny", not "insightful", pleas
    2. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A hallmark of civilization everywhere is the idea that the state, as embodied by the government, has a monopoly on violence.

      Guess I live outside of "civilization." Don't worry, I'm just as happy having a right to self-defense.

    3. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      So if a citizen uses violence in commission of a crime, a victim shouldn't respond with violence to protect him or herself, and should just allow the violent citizen to do whatever he wants?

    4. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's a weird statement for the GP to make, and I'm a Canadian. The government doesn't hold a monopoly on violence or means of violence, and nor should it, in a civilized society.

      If the state has no fear of its populace then you end up with tyranny -- even if that government is democratically elected.

      The US does a lot of weird things, but the 2nd amendment -- taken as a whole, not as the snippets bandied around -- is not one of them. (All of those amendments are excellent, by the way, and many governments -- mine included -- have used them as a framework for what should go into a Constitution.) One would, however, point out that things like handguns and rifles are ineffective against things like warships and long-range missiles, which ARE things the government has a monopoly on.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    5. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Targen · · Score: 1

      The Castro-like cult of personality for Chavez already exists. There is frankly little more to his political movement than obedience to Chavez. You can find ample evidence of this in the radical change of the movement's core principles that fit with almost perfect correlation the comings and goings of Chavez's political discourse. It's quite fun, actually, to observe the contrast between his old 1998 campaign speeches and what he says in his more recent public appearances. Not to pull a Godwin (as the personal similarities between the two dictators are few and far between), but it's reminiscent of the stuff Hitler used to say in his own speeches; once he said the Third Reich posed absolutely no threat to Poland, and, well, you know how that ended up.

    6. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Targen · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree with your general idea, but it's important to note Chavez very much promotes violence by citizens as long as it favors his own political movement. To be fair, he has recently put on a (hardly credible) show pointing to the contrary (by calling for the arrest of Lina Ron, for example), but it's not precisely significant; there's various of armed Chavista gangs that go around our various cities acting essentially as PSUV militia, to the point of defending "Chavista territory" in various cities, especially in Caracas; see, for example, what happened just last week when a peaceful protest by journalists came near the offices of Avila TV (one of our pro-Chavez channels, state-run of course). Or any of the various times the headquarters of Globovision (one of the few remaining broadcast TV channels that don't constantly and exclusively spread government propaganda) has been attacked with tear gas, fragmentation grenades, gunshots, etc.

    7. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chavez doesn't need to be a strong man. He buys support from the 40% of the population below the poverty line and the other 30% hovering just above it by redirecting profits from the oil fields. Who wouldn't vote for someone who is giving out free money when you're worried about how you will feed your children tonight.

      Can you tell me what article of the Consitution he is undermining? If I recall correctly, the Constitutional Referendum rejected rewriting the Constitution and Chavez has respected that.

      You are right about him wanting a Castro-like cult of personality.

      BTW I worked in Venezuela with some of the upper levels of government for a couple of years.

    8. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "things like handguns and rifles are ineffective against things like warships and long-range missiles,"

      But they are very effective against the people that run them.

      Or have I just been dreaming the last 6 years in Iraq?

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    9. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except your right to self defense is only to defend yourself against another person. You have no right to defend yourself against the government and it's agents (resisting arrest, etc).

      Also after you've defended yourself against another person the government reserves the right to decide if you were actually defending yourself and if you crossed the line of how far you can defend yourself (example: if you shot someone for punching you in the arm). So your "right" to self-defense isn't as cut and dry as you think.

    10. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by C0vardeAn0nim0 · · Score: 1

      according to the police here in my contry (brasil), yes. that's exactly what the victim should do.

      they're constantly stressing that a victim of robery should not react or take action, just hand the goods and pray for the best.

      --
      What ? Me, worry ?
    11. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      So should a victim of rape simply let the attacker do as he pleases? Or should she try to help him enjoy it more?

      I'm glad I'm not "civilized"....

    12. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      Or have I just been dreaming the last 6 years in Iraq?

      Sadly, no.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    13. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by kindbud · · Score: 1

      Says the Strong Man who ... dreams of creating a Castro-like cult of personality for himself.

      I'd say he already has. I mean, look at how he has you foaming at the mouth - just like people do at Castro.

      --
      Edith Keeler Must Die
    14. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Zombywuf · · Score: 1

      Is that not because Brasil was the country that figured out the quick work around for fingerprint based car ignition, i.e. steal the drivers fingers when you hijack the car. I mean, if a dozen children choose to mug me by ripping off all my clothes, I'd stand fairly still for fear of losing body parts. If they have guns, I'd probably give them the body parts if they asked.

      --
      If you can read this you've gone too far.
    15. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Zombywuf · · Score: 1

      Buying support is an interesting way of saying he stops his population starving and gives them access to healthcare. It's almost as if his support comes from him doing things the majority want him to do, instead of sloganeering.

      --
      If you can read this you've gone too far.
    16. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by tecnico.hitos · · Score: 1

      Guess I live outside of "civilization."...

      And soon everybody will. "Civilization" will be forbidden along with the other games.

      --
      The good, the evil and the vacuum tubes.
    17. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by lennier · · Score: 1

      "Guess I live outside of "civilization.""

      If you live in a situation where there isn't at least a temporary monopoly on violence -- or a disagreement as to who currently holds that monopoly -- it's generally called a "war zone"... the process of renegotiating the contract for supply of violence can get pretty hairy.

      Most people don't like living there. Maybe you're a mercenary or a war reporter, though?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    18. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by lennier · · Score: 1

      " "things like handguns and rifles are ineffective against things like warships and long-range missiles,"

      But they are very effective against the people that run them."

      Funny, I thought it was improvised explosive devices which did the most damage to the occupation troops.

      Not sure that those are legal in the US currently under any part of the Constitution, even by the NRO's standards.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    19. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by lennier · · Score: 1

      "The government doesn't hold a monopoly on violence or means of violence, and nor should it, in a civilized society."

      So, we should have completely privatized police and military, then, with multiple competing providers of each per nation?

      I know we're heading there, what with Blackwater (sorry, Xe now) and how McDonnell-Douglas and Boeing own a lot of the actual hardware and software which is run by the nominal "US government"... but wasn't sure we completely wanted to cross that Rubicon this century.

      Seems like it would do interesting things to the whole idea of borders and treaties. If you have multiple equal providers of military services inhabiting a contiguous landmass... jurisdiction would be a pain to sort out.

      In the old days, they'd call that situation "secession" or "treason", but I guess things have changed?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    20. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by alantus · · Score: 1

      Buying support is an interesting way of saying he stops his population starving and gives them access to healthcare. It's almost as if his support comes from him doing things the majority want him to do, instead of sloganeering.

      Really? Thats funny, I wonder if you've ever been to Venezuela, as healthcare is a joke, and we frequently have shortages of coffee, sugar, etc due to moronic goverment policies.

      I remember in particular when we were 6 months without any milk, I had frequent business trips to Colombia and my luggage was full of milk all the time.

    21. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Hey, I don't know about you but I passed the best times of my childhood playing the Trompo with my friends in Mexico.

      It is a really cool group game. Everyone gets a trompo and you can do "fights" between them, to see which gets out of the "ring"

      Too bad such types of typical games are being lost in the current society.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    22. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, she should try to run away and seek help from police or any other government authority. That's the only way to get completely out of trouble.
      If she does use violence to defend herself she will have to demonstrate in a tribunal that she had been attacked.

    23. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

      And I appreciate having a body of ocean between me and you. The problem is that your right to self-defence has the very real potential to fatally conflict with my right to life.

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    24. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      You're right, because we only have the 2 colours, black and white.

      Moderation.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    25. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Kilobug · · Score: 1

      Undermining constitutional order ? ChÃvez wanted to change the old, 4th Republic Constitution, indeed. He did a referendum. Then a Constitutional Assembly was elected. It redacted a draft. This draft was proposed to referendum. And massively approved to the people.

      Do you know what is inside the 1999 "Bolivarian" Constitution ? Did you read it ?

      I did read the constitutions of many countries. France, Germany, Italy, USA, USSR, proposed "European Constitution". From all of those, the 1999 Bolivarian one is by far the most democratic, and the most protective of human rights, both the individual and the collective rights.

      Go read it, it's a very interesting one. Until Bolivia and Ecuador followed the same process much more recently, I do believe (even if I didn't read them all), that the 1999 Constitution was the most democratic and protective of people's rights on the world.

    26. Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I'm glad I don't live that that hell-hole country where it's OK to rape women and they're not allowed to fight back.

  7. Just video games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about banning communist dictators?

  8. awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Em+Emalb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The country that has bought Sukhois, tanks and 100,000 AK-103's, is planning to build a manufacturing plant of Russian rifles, and oppresses peaceful marches has decided to ban 'violent' video games because they 'promote violence and can alter the behavior of children.'

    What the hell does this have to do with the actually meat of the issue? NOTHING. Nice troll.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mod parent insightful. As bad as Hugo is this summary is stupid. You could write a story in the same style about the US, and how they are the source of much pornography but is still trying to outlaw or severly restrict. Just pure trolling.

      Please critize Venzuela on sound ground. It is not that hard.

    2. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Rei · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The ridiculous part about that line is that Venezuela spends significantly less on defense spending than Colombia, it's oft-foe. And the "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.

      --
      Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
    3. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No. Your excuses are stupid.

      Venezeula is much more tightly controlled. In order for your lame analogy to
      work, it would have to be Bush or Obama that is encouraging the production of
      pornography. The fact that such activity exists in America (or any other normal
      democracy) is a reflection of the inherent CHAOS of a truely free society. People
      at large are free to engage in conflicting activities.

      You can have as many pornographers as you have anti-porn crusaders.

      Either and both can thrive without government encouragement or interference.

      Chavez is the pimp in this case. Neither Bush nor Obama are.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      Militarization demands increased violence in at least some segment of the population. Basically, it's not that Chavez opposes violence, it's that he opposes non-state-sanctioned violence. Boot camp doesn't turn you into a pacifist, and a more placid people are more easily ruled.

    5. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Entropius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think criticizing Venezuela for hypocrisy, as the summary did, is just fine.

      Just because the same criticism is also valid for the US doesn't make it any less valid elsewhere.

    6. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Venezuela isn't attempting to crush narcoterrorists(and whatever you might think about the actual legalization of drugs, FARC are narcoterrorists) in a low-key civil war across the country. Instead it's supporting said assholes to the detriment of it's neighbor.

    7. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Em+Emalb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. Your excuses are stupid.

      No, you're a big stupid head!

      Seriously, there's no need for name calling or putting down people. Your point is (somewhat) valid, you only weaken your position with derogatory remarks.

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    8. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Schnoogs · · Score: 0, Troll

      You're joking right? Soviet style weapons to go along with Soviet style censorship. Yeah...no possible connection there when you consider how Chavez has been running his country.

      Tin foil and kool aid stained lips for the loss.

    9. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the simple fact of a matter is that a truely free society will of course have ideological chaos due to the simple fact being that chaos is sometimes a good thing in being that it encourages competition in ideas and rights because without ideological chaos our society cant move forward and the american dream will be forfeit

    10. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "...pornography but is still trying to outlaw or severly restrict. "
      severely restrict? no. Just contain it from minors.
      I could start a pornography stuio right now, with ads and everything and not worry about armed people busting into my office and killing me, and then my family.

      And most pornography comes from outside the US borders.
      Actually I know a funny story about that...but it will have to wait.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    11. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Pedritox · · Score: 1

      It's hypocrisy, it's a government that promotes violence, every speech of Hugo is a violent one against people who think different than him, they support terrorists groups like FARC, they have paramilitary squads to beat the opposition and independent media like Tupamaros and La Piedrita lead by Lina Ron which has labeled 'contra-revolutionaries' as a military target, a government that has 'Goebbels' like propaganda media like VTV, Vea, or Telesur... etc, and they're close to 'ban' Globovision which is one of the few independent TV stations in there... etc.

    12. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ridiculous, Chavez is a dictator!, I lived there most of my live and it disgust me see what that monkey so called president is doing with the country

    13. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      I could start a pornography stuio right now, with ads and everything and not worry about armed people busting into my office and killing me, and then my family.

      Killing you? Not immediately. But you do have to worry about armed people busting in and forcing you into cages; a California couple were recently jailed for the "crime" of conspiracy to distribute "obscene" material through the mail and over the Internet.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    14. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Toonol · · Score: 1

      A more fitting American example might be states which have a government-ran lottery and video poker, but ban gambling? Although that's the same principle, gambling policy is obviously less critical than violence/free speech, though.

    15. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Pedritox · · Score: 1

      The U.S has extremists groups, like Christian Taliban, moral Taliban, Fox News, Jack Thompson... etc, but the Estate and the government doesn't ban anything, plus the U.S is not a dictatorship and tyranny like Venezuela.

    16. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, as someone who lives in Venezuela, it IS relevant to the issue, because all the bragging about buying russian weapons (AND using them against Colombia and/or the US) in his coke-fuelled speeches are on TV, mostly on every channel, before 10pm.

      You DON'T know this guy since this is the only news you get from what's happening here... Next in line will be "violent" movies? I truly can say this time that I don't know...

    17. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's been 1.410 protests (or "peaceful marches") this year alone in Venezuela.

      http://www.eluniversal.com/2009/08/26/pol_ava_unt-registra-1.410-p_26A2663087.shtml

      Venezuela is not in any actual war, despite our president menacing discourse, and constant threats to our neighbor and not so close countries.

      Colombia has been at war for almost 60 years now, and it's about double the size of Venezuela, so It's somewhat understandable that there are differences on defense spending.

      Of the only march that involved a coup (And a staged one by the way, as the president returned to power after three days on a foreign island, and it was supposedly because of 10,000 people chanting in front of the presidential palace, some coup) there exist video footage of government people opening fire against the multitude, there were 11 deaths because of this governmental represion which was what "prompted" the response of the military to ask Chavez for his resignation, his pal, who said in a TV broadcast: "Based on the current events, We asked the president to resign, which he did" went to become the head of the justice ministry (Equivalent to US DOD) and is now enjoying a peaceful position on an embassy in a nice country.

    18. Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! by Schnoogs · · Score: 0

      Uh oh...I must have pissed off Slashdot's resident commie. Chavez is that you? I had no idea you were a slashdot member.

      Hold on...I need to be modded informative...hmmm....how about this?

      LINUX IS TEH BEST EVA! WOOT+++

      MS IS TEH EVIL!!!

      That should work.

  9. Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe if there were MORE violent videogames there, there wouldn't be so much violence. In the US, the most violent places are the slums, places where the folks living there can't afford videogames.

    Violent crime has dropped in the US since videogames were invented.

    OTOH I played Quake with my daughters on our home network when they were teenagers, and my youngest (now 22) tried to beat the hell out of my girlfriend a couple of weeks ago. Maybe Quake is responsible? ;)

    1. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and my youngest (now 22) tried to beat the hell out of my girlfriend a couple of weeks ago. Maybe Quake is responsible? ;)

      I'd blame G.L.O.W.

      Got any footage of that?

    2. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OTOH I played Quake with my daughters on our home network when they were teenagers, and my youngest (now 22) tried to beat the hell out of my girlfriend a couple of weeks ago. Maybe Quake is responsible? ;)

      If you didn't date 18 y/o girls this probably wouldn't happen.

    3. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Minozake · · Score: 1

      Hehe. Sources would be nice.

      --
      http://sourcemage.org/ - Have fun :)
    4. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OTOH I played Quake with my daughters...and my youngest (now 22) tried to beat the hell out of my girlfriend....

      What your daughter needs, McGrew, is some dick. Let me have 'er for a few days. I'll starve her of Quake to make her all restless, then let her take out her animal aggression on me. I won't bite her...too hard :)

      -- Ethanol-fueled

    5. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Aphoxema · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hehe. Sources would be nice.

      Yeah, the story about having daughters and a girlfriend is convincing but I'd like to see some solid evidence of a /.er having life, for once.

      Wikipedia or GTFO

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
    6. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't, you disgusting troll. My GF's 44 years old, twice my daughter's age. Now get back under your goddamned bridge.

    7. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      The bar's owner has it, if he hasn't erased it already. There are three cameras in there; one pointed at the bar, one at the cash registers, and one at the video game machines.

      BTW, this comment is offtopic but my "NKB" and "NSB" checkboxes seem to not work...

    8. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My ass.

      I lived in the ghetto during middle school and into high school. Everyone had consoles, the most violent included.

    9. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Red4man · · Score: 1

      My GF's 44 years old, twice my daughter's age

      And from the sound of it, triple her weight, and half her IQ.

      --
      Sock Puppets: damn_registrars=pudge_confirmer=jimmy_slimmy=raiigunner=cml4524=a_klavan=red4men=ronpaulisanidiot
    10. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that the poster was a troll for suggesting that you can get 18 year old women to sleep with you? He didn't say 17, 16, or 12 years old. He said 18. A perfectly legal and moral age for an adult to have as a girlfriend. I guess, this just fall into different strokes for different folks, but suggesting you date 18 year olds seems like a strange thing to get upset about.

    11. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Yes, she is, but the GF's half your weight and twice your IQ.

    12. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by mcgrew · · Score: 1
    13. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I don't know what's to blame, maybe how you raised her?

      Seriously, a daughter getting violent with the parents GF. Something is fucked up.

      Oh, and you GF's age only matters if it's half your age or so. Now if your GF was a years younger then your daughter, that would be impressive.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    14. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Not when you're 57. If I was with anybody younger than 30 I'd feel like a child molester.

    15. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Red4man · · Score: 1

      That was as creative a response as "I KNOW YOU ARE, BUT WHAT AM I?"

      YHBT. HAND.

      P.S. I'm rubber, you're glue!!

      --
      Sock Puppets: damn_registrars=pudge_confirmer=jimmy_slimmy=raiigunner=cml4524=a_klavan=red4men=ronpaulisanidiot
    16. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by moose_hp · · Score: 1

      [...] and my youngest (now 22) tried to beat the hell out of my girlfriend a couple of weeks ago. Maybe Quake is responsible? ;)

      Maybe

      Was she circle strafing and rocket jumping while trying to beat your GF?

      --
      DON'T PANIC.
    17. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Are you saying that the poster was a troll for suggesting that you can get 18 year old women to sleep with you? He didn't say 17, 16, or 12 years old. He said 18. A perfectly legal and moral age for an adult to have as a girlfriend. I guess, this just fall into different strokes for different folks, but suggesting you date 18 year olds seems like a strange thing to get upset about."

      Hell yeah!!

      If I was boinking a good looking 18yr old, I'd be telling everyone about it, hell, I'd be showing videos!!

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    18. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      There's a rule of thumb for age discrepancies when dating that goes "half plus seven", as in divide your age by half, add seven, and you've got a reasonable floor that helps prevent you looking creepy. So, for mcgrew at 57, his target range starts at around 35 or so, and an 18 year old would be right out.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    19. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Targen · · Score: 1

      My GF's 44 years old

      There's your problem! And you thought Quake was to blame?

    20. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the Federal Dept of Health & Welfare (if there is any longer such a thing) should take advantage of the lower X-Box prices by distributing consoles to any family whose income falls below the official federal poverty level. That way if the parents are working, the kids have something that might keep them off the streets. And if the parents aren't working and they have addictive personalities, it will keep the parents off crack.

      I'm surprised Microsoft hasn't tried this strategy.

      Think of what could be done with such an opportunity if the NIH could devote resources to developing content that would allow obesity-at-risk populations to identify burgers & fries as the enemy or fast food 'restaurants' as enemy installations...

      No, no... it would never work. Not unless they developed complementary Nintendo Wii software and consoles that would control tele-cooking robots that would allow these same people to cook healthy meals through a gaming interface.

      Oh, the possibilities are endless!

    21. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Minozake · · Score: 1

      Never asserted such. However, I will say I happily have a girlfriend that has as little of a life as me.

      Besides. It's not my job to verify others' assertions. You should learn that.

      --
      http://sourcemage.org/ - Have fun :)
    22. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excuse me for intervening in your "so nice and educational" conversation. First, let me "identify" myself so that you don't have to crush your brains guessing "where is this lad coming out from?" I'm a Venezuelan citizen, living "the" Venezuelan reality. I've been reading opinions given before and after these ones of yours at this point, and I'm amazed at how easily people whose only reference about Venezuela's reality is what they get from such "reliable" information sources as U.S. media and international "partners". First of all, violence in Venezuela is not a byproduct of the Venezuelan "revolution". If you were really interested in knowing about our reality in this country so that you can properly give a fair and sound opinion, why don't you find out how things were berefore Chavez appeared for the first time before the public opinion? And I'm not talking just about security, but about each and every social, political, informational, economic, educational aspect in the nation. This country had been turned into "shit". But, because the U.S. government and establishment were obtaining huge benefits out of this "shit", everything was right, and Venezuela was catalogued as the "most prominent of democratic countries in the Western Hemisphere". If you were a Venezuelan, would you have liked it that way? Now it turns out that, because of all that, there comes somebody with the will and the guts to put everything in proper place, which obviously means "to kick the ones in the North right on the balls" by taking back everything that righteously belongs to this country and this people, and SAY IT!, the guy with the will and the guts becomes a dictator, a drugtrafficker, a terrorist, and the biggest enemy of democracy on this side of the world. Hard to understand? You'd better check yourself. I have to agree with some of Chavez's opponents about the fact that his "style" to say and do things is not the kind to be labeled "nice and appropriate for 'educated' ears" (including mine), but, to be simply just, everybody has to recognize that tough situations deserve tough measures, and that is what is being done, whether there may be some people that like it or not. Now, as a marginal note, I have the impression something similar (with minor differences) is happening right now in the U.S. with Barack Obama & his team and the "big moneysucking monsters" that have ruled that country for generations. Give money to those monsters, you're the right man for the seat. Try to help the poor and the needy, you're a "socialist" who deserves nothing less than a "coup" or, much better and less complicate, a bullet on the head (nothing new, anyway. There's quite some experience on that area. But please, don't call it "terrorism".) Now, on the "games" topic. You're right. They, and violent films, have nothing to do with criminal attitudes. So, every country around the globe should permit and do the things as they are done in The States: let's play games, let's watch films, let's smoke pot, or sniff cocaine, or swallow pills, and above all, let's stand up to defend the first (and only?) constitutional right, which, like no other, shows the real soul of the real democrat, and it is no other than the right to get, carry, and ABOVE ALL, USE GUNS of any kind, without limitations and at will whenever and wherever you want, against whomever you want; no reason required. But again, please, don't call it terrorism; it wouldn't be fair because, don't forget it, we're talking about the palladin of Justice, Democracy and Freedom. The bad guys, no doubt, are not in there, but everywhere else, and somebody has to stop them. Need to tell you who? (SORRY FOR BEING SO LENGTHY.)

    23. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      YHBT

      Any time I see one of your comments I know IHBT. HAND and have fun.

    24. Re:Jack Thompson moved to Venusuela? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      My daughter had been told lies, one of which was that my GF was only thirty and another was that the GF stole my and her mother's wedding rings.

  10. Games vs RL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The violence found in video games is translated into the real world.

    I believe it is "violence found in the real world is translated into video games"

    promote violence and can alter the behavior of children.

    I also wonder what used to alter the behavior in children to become violent before there were video games?

    1. Re:Games vs RL by Entropius · · Score: 1

      I also wonder what used to alter the behavior in children to become violent before there were video games?

      Religion and xenophobia, often combined.

    2. Re:Games vs RL by Eternauta3k · · Score: 1

      I believe it is "violence found in the real world is translated into video games"

      But the real-world violence that is reflected in video games is the one seen by their makers, who are mostly in developed countries (at least the designers are). Therefore it't not much of an argument against Chavez. Neither is buying guns, since when is buying guns for the army wrong? Hell, he's just doing it to show off.

      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
  11. banning video games.. by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    was never about actually reducing crime, it is about enforcing morality on others and controlling what media people are allowed to consume.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    1. Re:banning video games.. by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

      yup. If they could make a video game that somehow was a propaganda vehicle for Chavez then they would allow it. This has more to do with the fact that video games have more of a anti-communist and pro freedom and thinking point of view. Also I bet he doesn't want to see anything that promotes a pro-American view of history (Rambo, anyone?)

      If they had the know how to build a video game where Hugo Chavez conquers the fat capitalists it would be legal. Apparently they don't have programmers in Venezuela.

    2. Re:banning video games.. by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Not about reducing? That depends on the intent and motive... whether it does or not is the motive-ignoring debate.

      Enforcing morality? Somehow, I doubt that Chavez is interested in "enforcing morality." He's so moral himself.

    3. Re:banning video games.. by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 1

      I like the smell of sheep in the morning.

      --
      "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
    4. Re:banning video games.. by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Chavez's idea of morality is loyalty to himself and the state.

    5. Re:banning video games.. by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      as long as "the state" == chavez.

    6. Re:banning video games.. by wizardforce · · Score: 1

      Not about reducing?

      there is no evidence that banning these games reduces crime. none. either he's ignoring the stats out of ignorance [unlikely] or using "save the childrennn" as an excuse to clamp down on media. [very likely]

      Enforcing morality? Somehow, I doubt that Chavez is interested in "enforcing morality." He's so moral himself.

      I never said it was his morality that he was enforcing. sometimes enforcing the morality of a specific group conveys political benefits [the social conservatives' hold on the Right in the US as an example]

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    7. Re:banning video games.. by Targen · · Score: 1

      In this case, it's mostly about pushing out some new ridiculous law as quickly as possible to
      1) Please our great leader
      2) Distract the opposition from the terrible education law that was just passed. We're a couple weeks away from resuming classes after summer vacations, so they've got to make us forget about that as quickly as possible, lest there's a huge new wave of protests.

    8. Re:banning video games.. by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 1

      Technically, all criminal and most civil law is enforcing (legislating) morality. In the U.S. it is mainly the morality stemming from Judeo-Christian religious tradition and values. So what you are really disagreeing with is one particular manner or level of morality enforcement and not that morality is enforced in general. Unless people are true anarchists, they are glad that morality is legislated because it protects them as much as it does others.

    9. Re:banning video games.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about the fact that rich kids can afford video games. Chavez is legislating to hurt the wealthy, and that's all this video game thing is. He probably thinks he can get some support from at least some of the wealthy on it because of the think of the children angle, but the bottom line is that he's restricting something only rich kids can enjoy.

      Chavez isn't really all that into censoring if you look at the reality of what he's done rather than what you see on any media owned by someone rich (read: all media). The television stations he shut down were almost indisputably complicit in that failed coup of 2002- the owners of them continue to talk openly about overthrowing him. Any head of state who lets a chunk of media whose owners are guilty of trying to overthrow an elected government (ie commit treason) continue to operate for a half decade is, if anything, too permissive with regard to media. A media station that tried something like that in America would wind up with its owners in GTMO. Crackers in Caracas Chavez lets the guy who tried to steal the government from its people run a huge fucking television station, and you accuse him of censorship? Absolute freedom means freedom for those who can afford it, and their votes wind up counting a whole lot more than the votes of the masses when they own a few media outlets, which is why socialism and repression always seem to wind up together. It's a contradiction, and frankly, Chavez should be praised for his treatment of his opposition.

    10. Re:banning video games.. by Akhenertai · · Score: 1

      Considering they already controls the newspapers, the TV channels and the radio stations with the new Media Crime bill it was just missing the video games ... Ofcourse the Republica Bolivariana does not need any kind of opposition

  12. GTA Caracas by Atomm · · Score: 3, Funny

    You heard it here first!

    1. Re:GTA Caracas by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 2, Funny

      GTA? Wait, i'm reading about FreeSpace?

    2. Re:GTA Caracas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know it's meant to be a joke, but there is already a game with Caracas as battlefield - Mercenaries 2. You eve kill the scumbag president at the end of the story mode. Maybe Chavez didn't like it ?

    3. Re:GTA Caracas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AKA Mercenaries 2

  13. About the Editorializing by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The country that has bought Sukhois, tanks and 100,000 AK-103's, is planning to build a manufacturing plant of Russian rifles, and oppresses peaceful marches has decided to ban 'violent' video games because they 'promote violence and can alter the behavior of children.'

    Just because a country purchases utilities of force says nothing. What they do with them says everything. If a country employs them for their own protection from genuine threats, there is nothing wrong with them building or purchasing automat kalashnikovs.

    As for the video games promoting violence and altering the behavior of children, I do not believe this has been scientifically proved or disproved. And it may be hard if not impossible to do. I would recommend, when dealing with a populace, that you stick to common sense like 'acts of violence have been around long before video games' and point out that there is no statistical correlation between increased violence and increased violence in video games.

    Chavez promoted the use of traditional toys like the Yo-Yo and Trompo, and suggested that electronic toys like 'the Nintendo' be put aside because they promote 'egoism, individualism and violence.'

    Right, because it would be horrible if your kids got video games that made them think. We're dealing with politicians, not the populace here. I feel horrible for Venezuelan gamers but I wonder if this doesn't have to do more with the feelings that games convey to people more so than the violence. I can't help but think that CoD and other games that tell the stories of men who fought and died to stop fascists like Hitler and Mussolini must make other dictators afraid of that sense of freedom being conveyed -- and the violence to stop them being employed! It's possible this ban is more so a significance of the importance of games as a cultural medium. That might be reaching a bit far but I would guess there's some truth to it. Probably just as simple as Chavez trying to appeal to the older generations for support and using video games as a scapegoat.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:About the Editorializing by countertrolling · · Score: 2

      I do not believe this has been scientifically proved or disproved.

      Of course their behavior is affected. Just look at how the politics of an adult is driven by what they see on the TV over and over. They never vote, or even discuss beyond what's being spoon fed to them. Propaganda works, whether it's intentional or not. "The Game" can be a very useful tool.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    2. Re:About the Editorializing by umghhh · · Score: 1
      as for statistics - I heard on the radio the other day that police officers union here (Germany) issued a report on the issue. Apparently they claim that there is restrictions do not do any good. They admit however that among young skewed shooters and murderers in Germany in recent years majority if not all played violent guys and did it to such extent that they apparently lost it.

      I guess there is no easy way and the only thing simple prohibition is likely to achieve is black market and the best prevention is close community bonds that allow to see it coming early enough.

    3. Re:About the Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      violent means of self defense are still violent regardless of IF the other side started the violence, note: The fact that violent self defense is violent does not mean that violence = wrong. Violence is often looked on as the "right" solution depending on its reason

    4. Re:About the Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tl;dr

  14. Oh please by Rei · · Score: 5, Informative

    The country that has bought Sukhois, tanks and 100,000 AK-103's, is planning to build a manufacturing plant of Russian rifles, and oppresses peaceful marches

    Venezuela's defense spending is just over $2B/year. Their oft-foe, Colombia, spends about $6B/year. And the US spends over $400B/year.

    And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.

    Just today the AFP released a report showing Caracas as the second most violent city on the planet -- even more violent than Baghdad.

    Didn't bother to mention that New Orleans came in right after Caracas, with only one less murder per 100,000 people, did you? Or that Caracas's murder rate fell dramatically since their last survey. Skew much?

    --
    Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
    1. Re:Oh please by JWW · · Score: 1, Insightful

      C'mon. You've done a good job defending Chavez on defense and the general safety of his country.

      Now go the distance. I'm only reading this comments thread to try and find out of anyone on /. has the balls to stand up and defend Chavez for taking video games away from his people.

      Don't pull punches I'm waiting to see one of you liberal Chavez sympathizers defend THAT action HERE.

      I wanna see some fireworks!!

    2. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the point you are trying to make? That Venezuela is just as violent and oppressive as the US? I agree with you wholeheartedly.

    3. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for one small problem: Hugo Chavez is a fsking dictator whose role models (inferred) include Castro, Marx, Pol Pot, Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Joseph Stalin, Kim Jong Il, and various/sundry other demented mass-murderers. A coup here is a GOOD thing, dammit!

    4. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Venezuela's defense spending is just over $2B/year. Their oft-foe, Colombia---

      Colombia has terrorists groups to combat, Venezuela doesn't... and the U.S doesn't ban videogames which is the main issue here... which you ignore.

      And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.---

      You obviously have no idea what you're talking about, you either are living outside of Venezuela and think it's a peaceful country(nothing like supporting a dictatorship and tyranny like the Cuban or Venezuelan one when you live outside of it) or you're just trolling.... I'm just gonna tell you this, Hugo Chavez said on TV that every march of the opposition should be dissolved with 'gas del bueno', second of all you have no idea of the beatings that the opposition and independent journalists get when they encounter these Cuban like gangs, or the paramilitary squads like 'Tupamaros' and 'La Piedrita'. you obviously ignore or have no idea of the 34 radio stations that were close because they were of the opposition, and let's not forget about RCTV... etc. i suggest you investigate before commenting so you don't embarrass yourself like you're doing now by pretending you know everything about the topic in hand.

      Didn't bother to mention that New Orleans came in right after Caracas, with only one less murder per 100,000 people, did you? Or that Caracas's murder rate fell dramatically since their last survey. Skew much?

      New Orleans is not banning any violent videogames so there's no reason to mention any other city in the list, it's irrelevant, and the violence in Caracas has increased dramatically in the last 10 years of government, that's a fact that you can't hide, one of the highest murder rates in the world when it doesn't even have wars, even Colombia with terrorists groups has less murder rates, that sure tells you something....

      If you wanna know about the daily situation in Venezuela i suggest you read something like noticias24.com they just copy&paste reports from reuters, AFP, AP and EFE which are not 'terrorist media' like the government has labeled the independent media and they don't work for the CIA, Mossad or the "empire" like they always say.

    5. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.

      That's not true, you are uninformed. A lot of years have passed since the last attempt to coup Chavez's government. And FYI, he has almost banned "free speech," by incarceration and pursuit of oppositors. Just today, he has apprehended government officials who are not affiliated to his party.

      Although, he was elected most of his methods employed in his government are equal to those employed in a dictatorship.

    6. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Or that Caracas's murder rate fell dramatically since their last survey."

      Why do I get this strange feeling that, if true, this might have to do with the level of reporting?

      For some reason "bad news" and news contrary to government preferences doesn't seem to be very popular in Venezuela these days.

    7. Re:Oh please by Eternauta3k · · Score: 1

      Nope. He's an elected president who's taking advantage of Venezuela's (hell, Latin America's) lack of concern for institutions and democracy, pushing his perpetual reelection and too-socialist-for-my-liking measures. He's not a dictator yet

      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
    8. Re:Oh please by Pedritox · · Score: 1

      Venezuela's defense spending is just over $2B/year. Their oft-foe, Colombia---

      Colombia has terrorists groups to combat, Venezuela doesn't... and the U.S doesn't ban videogames which is the main issue here... which you ignore.

      And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.---

      You obviously have no idea what you're talking about, you either are living outside of Venezuela and think it's a peaceful country(nothing like supporting a dictatorship and

      tyranny like the Cuban or Venezuelan one when you live outside of it) or you're just trolling.... I'm just gonna tell you this, Hugo Chavez said on TV that every march of the

      opposition should be dissolved with 'gas del bueno', second of all you have no idea of the beatings that the opposition and independent journalists get when they encounter

      these Cuban like gangs, or the paramilitary squads like 'Tupamaros' and 'La Piedrita'. you obviously ignore or have no idea of the 34 radio stations that were close because

      they were of the opposition, and let's not forget about RCTV... etc. i suggest you investigate before commenting so you don't embarrass yourself like you're doing now by

      pretending you know everything about the topic in hand.

      Didn't bother to mention that New Orleans came in right after Caracas, with only one less murder per 100,000 people, did you? Or that Caracas's murder rate fell dramatically

      since their last survey. Skew much?

      New Orleans is not banning any violent videogames so there's no reason to mention any other city in the list, it's irrelevant, and the violence in Caracas has increased

      dramatically in the last 10 years of government, that's a fact that you can't hide, one of the highest murder rates in the world when it doesn't even have wars, even Colombia

      with terrorists groups has less murder rates, that sure tells you something....

      If you wanna know about the daily situation in Venezuela i suggest you read something like noticias24.com they just copy&paste reports from reuters, AFP, AP and EFE which are

      not 'terrorist media' like the government has labeled the independent media and they don't work for the CIA, Mossad or the "empire" like they always say.

    9. Re:Oh please by Knux · · Score: 1

      Venezuela's defense spending is just over $2B/year. Their oft-foe, Colombia, spends about $6B/year. And the US spends over $400B/year.

      IF those numbers are true, and I think those $2B/year spent on Venezuela is quite low, Colombia spends that much per year because they're fighting narco-terrorists (FARC). Terroristst with wich Chavez has friendship, terrorists who received same bazoocas and a few dozen rockets from Venezuela's army.

      And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.

      Even those made by high school studants in the last couple of years?

    10. Re:Oh please by Rei · · Score: 1

      New Orleans is not banning any violent videogames so there's no reason to mention any other city in the list, it's irrelevant, and the violence in Caracas has increased dramatically in the last 10 years of government, that's a fact that you can't hide, one of the highest murder rates in the world when it doesn't even have wars, even Colombia with terrorists groups has less murder rates, that sure tells you something....

      New Orleans doesn't "even have wars" either, and their murder rate is essentially the same as Caracas's. Is New Orleans' murder rate Chavez's fault as well?

      As for your comments about Chavez ordering the (oft violent -- but you'll never admit to that, despite video evidence) opposition marches tear gassed, well, gee, that never happens here, now does it? And give it a rest about the radio and TV stations, which were owned by the very people who organized a coup against him and constantly try to promote his overthrow. The people you're supporting sponsored the overthrow of a democratically elected government. When they took power, their very first act was to dissolve the judiciary. When Chavez regained power, what did he do? Practically nothing -- they got house arrest. Freaking *house arrest* for *overthrowing the government*. Do you know what we'd do here in the US to those who overthrew our government? We'd bomb their hometowns flat. This is your hardened dictator, because he shuts down their mouthpieces? Give me a freaking break.

      --
      Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
    11. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI Rei, the "Coup" you refer to did not exist. According to the Supreme Court in Venezuela there was "a lack of power", when one of the Generals appeared on TV saying that they asked Chavez for his resignation, and he agreed. After that he said that he "didn't saw the resignation letter", and he was awarded with an embassy.

      Just like a few days ago another peaceful march was violently attacked by the police forces, and the lieutenant in charge of teh agression was also rewarded with a medal.

      So please, shut your mouth if you have no idea of what's going on there.

      PS: In case you don't believe there was a resignation letter, here you got it honey... https://secure.wikileaks.org/leak/chavez-resignation-letter-2002.jpg
      Now go and hurry and tell your cuban friends to ban the site asap.

    12. Re:Oh please by jlar · · Score: 1

      "And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup."

      I thought the coup happened after an illegal demonstration by opposition groups and did not "involve" the coup. But anyway: So, you say that because a huge demonstration in 2002 violated directions on where they could demonstrate and therefore clashed violently with another demonstration you believe that it is sensible to use this as a carte blanche to harass peaceful demonstrations in general.

      But nevermind. Let us rather look at the full picture of freedom in Venezuela. Freedomhouse.org publishes a survey of the political rights and civil liberties in all countries in the world every year. In their survey Venezuela is now a partially free country with a score of 4 (on a scale from 1-10 with 1 being the best) on both accounts. For comparison Cuba has a 7/6 (non free) score while USA has a 1/1 (free) score. So Venezuela is not as bad as Cuba but there is certainly room for improvement.

    13. Re:Oh please by Pedritox · · Score: 1

      they're fighting narco-terrorists (FARC).----

      Peru fought at their peak, two terrorists groups like MRTA and Sendero Luminoso(there's still some small remnants tho), Colombia is fighting the remnants of the AUC, ELN(which by the most part has fusioned with FARC), and FARC itself which remains the biggest threat.

      People who defend these bullshit are like Oliver Stone or Noam Chomsky who was just vising Hugo Chavez this past week, apologizing his bullshit tyranny and dictatorship. every dictator in history has his apologetic. again... it's 'awesome' to defend a tyrannic regime when you live outside of it.

    14. Re:Oh please by Rei · · Score: 1

      2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt

      There's 40 sources about the details of the coup. As for your resignation letter, I love how you linked to the image instead of the page that covers it, where it is headlined Purported President Chavez resignation letter, and includes the description, "regardless of its veracity". And read the letter's talk page -- nobody there believes its veracity. For example:

      "If I see correctly (resolution is too low) the letter is dated as April 13th, not April 11th. If Chávez renounced (Which I think he did) he did it the 11th, not the 13th, when he was almost certain to return. I oppose to Chávez, but I think this is a hoax. "

      And, FYI, I don't type with my mouth. I think you'll find that you get a better words-per-minute rate if you use your fingers, as I do.

      --
      Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
    15. Re:Oh please by Pedritox · · Score: 1

      I'm just gonna say this:

      Every dictatorship in history has had its apologetics.

      And it's awesome to support and defend a regime like the Cuban, North Korean, Belorussian, Burmese, Venezuelan... ones, when you live outside of them.

    16. Re:Oh please by Targen · · Score: 1

      Inferred? Castro and Marx are quite explicitly two of his role models. He was quite friendly with Saddam back in the day, too, although one might say that was mostly (oil) business. Don't forget about Ahmadinejad, who has quite ample support from Chavez, as has been made explicitly and directly evident with some of Chavez's comments during the recent rounds of Iranian protests.

    17. Re:Oh please by Pedritox · · Score: 1

      Just like Vivanco said(from Human Righs Watch) "using the coup attempt to justify everything!", and you're doing the same thing. in the caribbean gulag, the warden does the same thing, labeling everything as a part of the 'empire' or the 'CIA' ... etc, just to justify its closure or incarceration.

    18. Re:Oh please by Targen · · Score: 1

      The country that has bought Sukhois, tanks and 100,000 AK-103's, is planning to build a manufacturing plant of Russian rifles, and oppresses peaceful marches

      Venezuela's defense spending is just over $2B/year. Their oft-foe, Colombia, spends about $6B/year. And the US spends over $400B/year.

      You have a point regarding the US, but it's sort of a silly comparison with Colombia there; they have to deal with FARC, ELN and the various paramilitary groups that fight those two (which, to be fair, have been and possibly continue to be funded by the state in some cases).

      And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.

      Do you have any idea of how many enormous marches against Chavez there have been in this country in the past ten years? The coup was in 2003 and it was a military action, not a storming of the Miraflores palace by the people. And there've been possibly hundreds of anti-Chavez marches since then.
      As an aside, it's always good to remind you that Lucas RincÃn Romero, the highest-ranking general at the time, who was very much involved and cooperative with the coup (he's the one who famously announced on national TV the president's resignation was requested, "which he accepted"), ended up becoming Chavez's minister of interior and justice for a while, and he's now our ambassador to Portugal. Yeah, the guy at the head of that coup. Just sayin'.

      Just today the AFP released a report showing Caracas as the second most violent city on the planet -- even more violent than Baghdad.

      Didn't bother to mention that New Orleans came in right after Caracas, with only one less murder per 100,000 people, did you? Or that Caracas's murder rate fell dramatically since their last survey. Skew much?

      Careful with those numbers; they might be based on official murder statistics, which conveniently filter out a very significant ammount of assassinations carried out by corrupt police officers. Some of our official murder statistics even exclude deaths resulting from gang shootings, since those are, according to our former minister of interior and justice RamÃn Rodriguez ChacÃn, not what the murder statistics are really about. I really wish there was a link on Youtube I could show you with the clip of the interview where he said that.

    19. Re:Oh please by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "In their survey Venezuela is now a partially free country with a score of 4 (on a scale from 1-10 with 1 being the best) on both accounts. For comparison Cuba has a 7/6 (non free) score while USA has a 1/1 (free) score. So Venezuela is not as bad as Cuba but there is certainly room for improvement."

      Since the US is patently the worst country in the world, by all measures, that survey must be fraudulent.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    20. Re:Oh please by arielCo · · Score: 1

      Venezuela's defense spending is just over $2B/year. Their oft-foe, Colombia, spends about $6B/year. And the US spends over $400B/year.

      It's more than spending - this is the guy who yells in nationwide TV that "this revolution is peaceful, but armed", calls to "crush and pulverize the offensive by the coup-monging opposition", and rolls tanks to the border when Colombia takes their squabbles with the guerrilla less than 200 km from the border.

      And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.

      Maybe he means this, which is hardly a coup. After opposition demonstrators asked for permission to march down to the congress, pro-govt groups filed their own request to also go there; guess who got the green light and who were told to stop 25 blocks away. It's unclear whether the demonstrators tried to tear down the barrier before or after the gas and rubber bullets flew (he also yelled orders on TV to "gas them with the good stuff").

      Didn't bother to mention that New Orleans came in right after Caracas, with only one less murder per 100,000 people, did you? Or that Caracas's murder rate fell dramatically since their last survey. Skew much?

      Care to source that? Caracas is currently clocking in at 130 murders per 100k.

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
    21. Re:Oh please by Targen · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of the Ley Habilitante? It's basically special legislative powers given to the president by the legislature. Insta-laws. Dictated, not discussed and voted on. It's been given to Chavez by the 100%* pro-Chavez legislature three times, last I checked. Granted, it's the opposition's own fault for calling for a boycott on the elections that made that legislature. Still damn close to dictatorship, however. They're already (illegally) indefinitely postponing some (largely unimportant) elections, but the real test will be late next year, when the next iteration of legislative elections comes. Stay tuned; it's likely, IMHO, that those elections won't happen. Feel free to place your own bets :) * with the exception of three lawmakers from a formerly pro-Chavez party, Patria Para Todos (PPT), that is now kinda-sorta-anti-Chavez, sometimes, sometimes not.

    22. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Colombia has more than twice the citizens Venezuela has and they have a so-called war against the FARC, so their defense expenses are very well justified. However, in Venezuela, we have no war, the majority of the police forces have really no official issued weapons or just very old ones. They ride the city in their own basic streets motorcycles and with guns obtained in the black market. Also, most military personnel is deployed at the borders, where they run various side business ranging from trading or giving their weapons to the FARC to kidnapping. Most people do not trust any police or military force as even the government has admitted that they are behind the rampage increase in kidnapping in the past couple of years. So where do the money really go? The police forces? The military? Defending the borders? Protecting the citizens? And yes, there was a "freaking coup". I guess citizens tend to do that when they realize their governments run wild and heavily attack the will and liberties of the citizens, including the 80% that lives in poverty. They are usually the ones that suffer the most from these types of oppressive regimes. Finally, I really don't know about the New Orleans situation, but in Caracas, you can get killed when they try to steal your car, your shoes, your wallet, your cellphone, to kidnap you, or just because they felt like it, and even worse, there's really no CSI-like force here, so from "official" figures, only 2% to 3% of homicides are ever solved, and to make matters even worse there are no "bad" or "good" neighborhoods, it really just happens everywhere at any time. In case you're wondering, I lived in Caracas (temporary job relocation) for about 3 years until very recently; never wore a watch, jewelry, cellphone always on my pocket, never really visited a bank unless I had to, did not give my personal information to anybody, not even to most of my co-workers, and kept a low profile. I was robbed about 18 times, always near my employer's offices or my apartment (my office was located in the nicest part of the town, actually), had a gun pointed at me about 7 times and I didn't even carry cash on me most of time or something useful they wanted to take. Two co-workers were kidnapped and released, a couple of friends moved overseas, and a friend of a co-worker was killed when they tried to steal his SUV and since it had satellite GPS tracking they just dumped him and the SUV and did not even care about it. It was never solved. And no, I do not look "American" or "Foreign". So there it goes for your "Oh Please".

    23. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering that Mr. Chavez donates about $1B to the FARC, which murders/kidnaps/tortures thousands of innocent and helpless people, maybe we should consider that he only spends $1 Billion in defense, and 1 Billion for his "charity."

    24. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Caracas's murder rate hasn't fell at all, it keeps going up, the government controls the surveys and doesn't count death gangs confrontations and much more.
      Is not fair to compare with the US which has over 10 times the population of Venezuela, and likes to put their noses every where so they don't have any other option tan by weapons and keep fighting or else... but Venezuela doesn't need any weapons, they are not fighting anyone, the government has an imaginary war with the US, and they keep violating human rights of their own people.

    25. Re:Oh please by Omestes · · Score: 1

      I personally like Chavez, and even if I didn't I don't think the US has ANY right whatsoever to complain about it. I find the silly "they don't live the American way! We can't make money off of exploiting their poor!" stuff a rather depressing statement about my own country (who I am a lot less proud off now that we know more about Cheney and his hired hit squads, and our love of torture). Who cares? Great, if the Venezuelans don't like Chavez, let them vote him out, or have a real, authentic, coup. Not our business. Same with Cuba, btw, same with every other country in the world. If they don't want to be like America, good for them, if it works. If the whole damn universe became socialist or communist, I don't think I'd lose a second of sleep.

      That said, I don't agree with his banning violent video games. See what I did there? Just because you like someone, doesn't mean you have to love everything about them. I personally find Chavez to be a bit of a blow hard, and I dislike the cult of personality thing too, its a shallow way of leading. Wow... I still don't think the guy is an antichrist though.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    26. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I donâ(TM)t know where did you get the budget figures:

      2006 Venezuela's defense budget was $4.5 Billions
      2007 $6.5 Billions
      2008 more than $9 billions

      Since Venezuela does not publish the whole expenditures because more than a half of the purchases are not part of the parliament bill (Ley Presupuesto Anual Aprobada por la Asamblea Nacional), these figures needs to be estimated from the press releases, the international contracts signed by the government and what the president himself says on his Sunday live show "alo presidente".

      Colombia on the other hand, publishes all the expenditures under a "proyecto anual de presupuesto" which is the congress bill for the fiscal year. In their case there are not hidden budgets and the president does not control a private budget fund like Hugo Chavez does (called Fonden). ...

      Regarding the marches, please note also that up today there are many, many open questions about the march involved the âoecoup dâ(TM)etatâ in 2002. There are not an impartial investigation about what really happened on April 2002, and the only prosecutions made donâ(TM)t clarify the Supreme Court (Tribunal Supremo) statement ruling out a âoecoup dâ(TM)etatâ, the President resignation announced by the military chief of join staff and posterior presidential comments about he forced the âoecoup dâ(TM)etatâ in order to consolidate the âoerevolutionâ. ...

      Regarding the violence on the Venezuelan cities, in think is not fair to compare them with what happens on other places. On my opinion we need to compare with ourselves, for instance: do you know that we had about a 500% of violent increment (including murdering, kidnapping and drug traffic and abuse) during the last 10 years, which happens to be is the time Chaves has been ruling Venezuela.

    27. Re:Oh please by arielCo · · Score: 1

      This may make you reconsider (you may need a translator). Bet you don't know this one: after his party lost the mayorship of Caracas, he "asked" the parliament (roughly 90% unquestioningly loyal, 10% ocassionally critical sympathizers) to pass a law transferring most of the attributions of that office to a new "Head of Government" appointed by the president without need for confirmation. Here's the nice part: he didn't wait for the legal term of the mayor to end - he named one right away, regardless of the people's will as expressed when they voted.

      Please take some time to look beyond the "he's leftist, anti-US, pro-worker" oversimplification that prevails outside the country - it's more of a persona that fulfills a well-liked stereotype. Back in '98 he flatly denied being a socialist or nationalizing anything, later he starting denouncing "neoliberalism", then "savage capitalism", now he won't stop talking about socialism and expropriating factories, farms and even a major bank. All the while, all the unfulfilled promises have been blamed on either the CIA, local and foreign oligarchies, and the 40 years under a two-party system before him (never mind it's been 10 years of that).

      But don't believe me, look it up on any news outlets that don't lean too heavily to any side. Listening to him on YouTube is a very good start if you want to get a feel for what he really is up to.

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
    28. Re:Oh please by Omestes · · Score: 1

      You may be right, hell you probably are right, but my main point stands; Hugo Chavez is a Venezuelan problem, not a US problem. I don't like a lot of things about him, as I stated, I mainly agree with his current rhetoric. The main thing is that my opinion should have no bearing whatsoever on Venezuela, and thus doesn't matter one bit.

      In my country most of the opposition to the Chavez isn't based based on any of the facts you listed, its purely ideological (as I admit most of my liking of him is), based off of a home (i.e. foreign) spun image of the guy as a tool towards conflicting ideologies. I'm more bashing them, than I am the actual people involved, or having to live under him.

      More to the point, I was responding to the person who was saying that if you like someone, you must like all of their policies.

      I will, though, read up on it more. Not that my opinion, revised or not, should play any role in anything of import outside of silly internet hand waving.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    29. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news, Australia has submarines, fighter jets and even tanks and they also ban violent video games!

      I'd like to see one of you conservative centre-left Liberal sympathisers defend that action.

    30. Re:Oh please by xtracto · · Score: 1

      and the U.S doesn't ban videogames which is the

      Only when they show a tit, or a couple making love while "drinking coffee".

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    31. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Venezuela's defense spending is just over $2B/year. Their oft-foe, Colombia, spends about $6B/year. And the US spends over $400B/year.

      I believe the spending grows as the population grows. I'm not going to defend Colombia, but they have almost 4 times the population of Venezuela. USA probably 20 times more. Not that I defend the military spending, but let's face it that the bigger the country the more resources are required in the armed forces.

    32. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The main thing is that my opinion should have no bearing whatsoever on Venezuela, and thus doesn't matter one bit.

      The mind-your-own-business argument is frequently and loudly raised by him, but it doesn't go both ways. Compare his bold declarations about the US embargo on Cuba, Taiwan vs. RPC, Colombia, Honduras, Iraq, Dems vs Reps, etc etc, to his reaction whenever anyone voices concern about this country. Also check out his recent attempts to sneak Zelaya back into power after the coup.

      I don't like a lot of things about him, as I stated, I mainly agree with his current rhetoric.

      Thing is, most of what you likely perceive as his rethoric is just a flattering, undeserved stereotype (the "prevailing oversimplification"). Truth is, he's not a socialist but a steamroller statist and the very few programs that somehow help the poor/disadvantaged stand for a tiny fraction of the spending. Inefficiency runs rampant due to dog-and-pony projects that never get anywhere, and the cost of each Su-30 or Mi-35 bought for an unlikely war plus training and maintenance would pay for a small hospital in the slums, or gear and salaries for LOTS of policemen.

      As someone said here, he's a champion of himself and no one else ("there's no revolution without Chavez", quoth the Leader). He doesn't mind having double standards and spending the people's money to boost his popularity here and abroad; I'd bore both of us with a detailed account of the abuse of power and irresponsibility (I'm tempted to write one but gathering the references is a PITA), but any foreign admirer would do well to earn a living here for a year or so while listening directly to him and his officials. Sorry if I got too worked up about a secondary point.

      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey

      Wish us luck.

  15. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by megamerican · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The United States should take the side of the oppressed there, not shake hands with CastroLite.

    Because the United States has such a great track record of installing democracy and non-oppressive leaders in foreign nations....

    Why can't we leave others alone and worry about problems in our own country?

    --
    If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
  16. Is this really a surprise? by grapeape · · Score: 0, Troll

    Most "violent" games (with the exception of games like GTA which could be seen as training materials there) tend to have a storyline emphasizing fighting for justice, freedom and stopping oppression. With a government that is opposed to those principles the biggest surprise is that it took them this long. Chavez evidently learned nothing from his own rebellion in 92 but then dictators tend to think oppression is fine as long as they are the ones giving it.

  17. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I've been to Caracas, only place where I've seen banks, car dealerships and even some nice restaurants have several armed guards with pump shotguns and automatic weapons.

    1. Re:Anonymous Coward by Rei · · Score: 1

      Meh, I saw that in Costa Rica, which is by all standards one of the safer, more stable Central American nations. You see some nice mall that by all standards could equally well blend in in Iowa, except for the guy out front with the military-style assault rifle.

      --
      Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
    2. Re:Anonymous Coward by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Oddly, I saw this in Oakland. Sure it wasn't a shotgun, but some huge security guard followed me around a Walgreens while menacingly slapping a billy club into the palm of his hand. Actually in post Katrina New Orleans you can see many armed guards wandering about, keeping people from basic services.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    3. Re:Anonymous Coward by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      I've seen this in dozens of countries in Latin America and elsewhere. Venezuela is comparable to Peru, Ecuador, Mexico, and many others.

  18. Maybe if... by thepooh81 · · Score: 1

    they used their police force to stop crime instead of enforcing Chavez's whims the crime would go down?? But nah, blaming video games is easier...

  19. Scapegoat? Propaganda? Never! by LitelySalted · · Score: 1

    This is probably just the beginning of a downward spiral. Soon, the government will be spouting off propaganda about how Western Civilization seems to be the country's downfall.

    OR this could just be a big move to recruit more soccer players... probably not.

  20. So... by InfinityWpi · · Score: 1

    ... how's life in beautiful war-torn Venezuela?

    1. Re:So... by Stenchwarrior · · Score: 1

      I totally didn't mean to mod that Redundant. Damn kid hit my elbow when I was about to click "Insightful". This post should un-do that....

      --
      Loading...
  21. Silly Venezuela by Verdatum · · Score: 1

    Quit copying Brazil!

    1. Re:Silly Venezuela by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Brazil the country, or Brazil the movie?

  22. biased view by delete2kill · · Score: 0

    the posting is biased..... first quote by writer already shows his leanings... this isint a discussion its a statement shouting WTF, i mean sure it may be a violent city..but at least they are trying for a change of their society...at least they are willing maybe not in right direction but their willingness to change...even something as small as violent games may provide a good vibe from citizen and this wave might move to banning guns and other weapons and move to a civil society

    1. Re:biased view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok

    2. Re:biased view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish there was a "Naïve" option when moderating posts.

    3. Re:biased view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... move to banning guns and other weapons and move to a civil society

      I've found that an armed society is much more civil and polite than an unarmed one.

    4. Re:biased view by CorporateSuit · · Score: 1

      First off, it's an editorial summary, those are simply part of slashdot. If you want non-editorial summaries, try somewhere else. Second, change for the worse should be criticized. That's the most important criticism a person can offer.

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    5. Re:biased view by Darkness404 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Editorials are biased. TFA is really, as the name implies, the article. TFS is an editorial.

      And this is the most scary part

      , Chavez promoted the use of traditional toys like the Yo-Yo and Trompo, and suggested that electronic toys like 'the Nintendo' be put aside because they promote 'egoism, individualism and violence.'

      Because we all know how -terrible- individualism is. But really when you look at oppressive regimes you see the death of individualism as a key characteristic. This just proved what most people knew: Chavez is a power-hungry dictator.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    6. Re:biased view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also wish Slashdot would find its way into the 21st Century and support Unicode. Or, not even unicode, isn't the double-dotted-i in regular ASCII? God damn, fix your shit assholes.

    7. Re:biased view by JWW · · Score: 1

      Yep, because taking away their video games and weapons would JUST be to move to a civil society. Those actions would NEVER be used to oppress people's freedom.

    8. Re:biased view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This just proved what most people knew: Chavez is a power-hungry dictator.

      There's actually a lot of people who don't know that.

      OK, well, they *do* know it but they pretend they don't know it. They act like he's some sort of socialist liberator hero protector of the downtrodden exploited proletariat, but they only do it because he dislikes George Bush almost as much as they do and isn't afraid so say so since he has his own country to hide behind while we're too busy elsewhere to go down and step on him like the nasty little annoying pest that he is.

    9. Re:biased view by CorporateSuit · · Score: 1

      Time to scrap my plans for a Venezuela-only release of my new video game "Assassinating Hugo Chavez" and its prequel "Photographing Hugo Chavez While He Has Sex with Farm Animals"

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    10. Re:biased view by Hatta · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with being biased in favor of freedom?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    11. Re:biased view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nicely put...
      however...........it is more like bully picking on the weakest child in the class
      i mean look parents always have trouble understanding gamers..and all games are more or less symbol of america ..and since they dont understand games +comes from america=save my child from american brainwashing

  23. Individualism == danger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Individualism is the main target here, because the individual is the greatest danger that the State has.

  24. and.... by morsmortis · · Score: 0

    Tipper Gore approves!

  25. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Well, when we tried to depose him, he was democratically and legitimately in power (still is?). Maybe now that he's a dictator and thug, we can make him our ally again like all the others we support?

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  26. Please get Jack Thomson to back this in public! by MartinSchou · · Score: 2

    That way Fox News will be forced to calling him a socialist supporter of Hugo Chavez and close one of the last places that man can get any airtime.

    1. Re:Please get Jack Thomson to back this in public! by jameskojiro · · Score: 1

      Seriously it would be like adding anti-matter to a big steaming pile of matter.

      --
      Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    2. Re:Please get Jack Thomson to back this in public! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like adding doesn't-matter to a big steaming pile of wants-to-matter.

  27. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because the United States has such a great track record of installing democracy and non-oppressive leaders in foreign nations....

    Ever heard of Germany or Japan?

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
  28. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Frequently; because there aren't a whole lot of other examples...

  29. Yo-Yos can be dangerous... by mrboyd · · Score: 1

    They obviously missed The substitute 2. Otherwise they would have banned those dangerous thing too.

    That said I miss mine. Can anyone recommend a good brand? yotech, bumblebee, other?

  30. Who tagged this "Fascism"? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 2, Funny

    The people doing this are the United Socialist Party. Hugo Chavez is a champion of workers' rights, a bane to American-style capitalist corporations, heavily influenced by Marx, and a socialist to the core.

    He is also the democratically elected leader of his country.

    1. Re:Who tagged this "Fascism"? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Do you live in a world in which Venn diagrams never overlap? Do your sets lack the difference operation, because it always returns the empty set? I would like to hear more about your insights into mathematics.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    2. Re:Who tagged this "Fascism"? by schnikies79 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, he is a champion of himself and gives a damn about anyone else.

      --
      Gone!
    3. Re:Who tagged this "Fascism"? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      I would just like to add that I live in a world where the definitions of "difference" and "intersection" are swapped.

      D'oh.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    4. Re:Who tagged this "Fascism"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was tagged fascism because some of the elements of fascism (eg conform or else) are shared with modern liberalism (eg political correctness).

      The person who tagged it fascism probably refuses to recognize that some of the elements of modern conservativism (eg morality by law and the corporate veil begat by corporation and government in rut) are also fascist elements and thinks their shit smells like roses.

    5. Re:Who tagged this "Fascism"? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      With his economic policies, there won't be any workers to have rights (Chávez's economic policies and price controls means that, for instance, a used car is significantly more expensive than a new car...)

      Now I personally think golf is a waste of time... but guess what Chávez also wants to ban?

    6. Re:Who tagged this "Fascism"? by FourthAge · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I used to assume that the left-wing dictators pretended to be left-wing merely as a tool of control, allowing them to be as selfish as they wanted, filling the Swiss bank account while pretending to have the people's interests at heart.

      But having read a rather long (and definitely unsympathetic) biography of Stalin, I'm no longer so sure. I think many of them really believe in what they are doing, and are genuinely convinced that it is for the best.

      For example, in the early years of WW2, Hitler broke his non-aggression pact and invaded Russia. Initially, this invasion was going very well for the Germans, and Stalin became convinced that the war was lost. He went to his dacha outside the city, and for a few days, none of his henchmen dared to give any orders because they couldn't run them past the big man. Eventually, the henchmen decided to go to Stalin's house.

      "There, sitting nervously in an armchair, was a 'thinner... haggard... gloomy' Stalin. When he saw the seven or so Politburo members entering, Stalin 'turned to stone'... he looked at them searchingly and asked: 'Why've you come?'

      "Stalin 'looked alert, somewhat strange', recalled Mikoyan, 'and his question was no less strange. Actually he should have summoned us himself. I had no doubt: he decided we had arrived to arrest him.'...

      "'We're asking you to come back to work...'

      "'Yes but think about it,' answered Stalin. 'Can I live up to the people's hopes any more? Can I lead the country to final victory? There may be more deserving candidates.'"

      I think this moment of vulnerability, in front of the men who could destroy him and had reason to do so, gives a lot of insight into the mind of Stalin. History remembers a monster, and of course this is correct, but nevertheless he was a rational man who believed he was doing the right thing for the USSR. When things went badly, he felt guilty for failing the people. He almost destroyed himself because of it.

      Is this the action of a selfish man, considering only himself? I think not. Stalin's actions are entirely explained by the Marxist religion. In his mind, he did act for the people. He did help them! He freed them from the capitalists, the bourgeois and the imperialists. The mass executions, the war and the starvation were all necessary to achieve that end. Stalin was exactly what he claimed to be: a truly left-wing dictator.

      --
      The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
    7. Re:Who tagged this "Fascism"? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      Hugo Chavez retains power because Venezuela has historically had such a dramatic gap between the wealthy few and the poor many, and he has, generally speaking, improved the lot of the poor many. Of course, he's done this in an economically unsustainable way, and eventually it will all go to rot. But the wealthy classes in Venezuela have a history of profound and ongoing indifference to the large mass of poor, and a democracy with such a dramatic rich/poor gap will inevitably turn into a populist re-distributionist state.

  31. The yo-yo is a weapon by lalena · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Chavez promoted the use of traditional toys like the Yo-Yo

    But the yo-yo is a weapon: Inventors of the yo-yo

    In the Philippines, the yo-yo was a weapon for over 400 hundred years. Their version was large with sharp edges and studs and attached to thick twenty-foot ropes for flinging at enemies or prey.

    1. Re:The yo-yo is a weapon by Stenchwarrior · · Score: 1

      Here I thought Genyo Takeda was the inventor of the Yo-Yo as a weapon.

      --
      Loading...
    2. Re:The yo-yo is a weapon by geekoid · · Score: 1

      yes, but it's not a virtual violence; which is the worse kind of violence~

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:The yo-yo is a weapon by hurfy · · Score: 1

      lol, i just about had one of those. I made a butterfly style yo-yo with 14 feet of string to use off the 2nd story balcony at camp once. Flinging it out in front of you at ground level would make a weapon...or at least break wood spindles in the staircase if one miscalculates 14 feet by a foot or so....

  32. 2 points by jbeaupre · · Score: 1
    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    1. Re:2 points by Rei · · Score: 1

      Wow, a government accused of (and denying) providing aid insurgents within its enemies' borders!

      Thank God we'd never do anything like that...

      --
      Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
  33. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by megamerican · · Score: 1

    Yes, they were two nations whom we actually declared war against because one of them attacked us.

    Have you ever heard of Vietnam, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Argentina, Guatemala, Paraguay, etc....?

    --
    If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
  34. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by lgw · · Score: 1

    That's actually pretty funny. Iraq is rapidly becoming a third example, I think, but it doesn't change your point much. We suck at supporting the "good guys" as a nation. Even if Iraq turns out to be glorious, it's merely the first of many attempts just in Iraq that worked out well. Our primary failing seems to be that we support dictators who claim to support America and democracy over actual democracy, which is pretty epic fail.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  35. Many peoples ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many peoples won't be affected by violence in videogames... but don't overestimate the human specie... MANY are affected...

    Like ME!!! BANGBANGBANGBANGBANGBANGBANGPOFPOFPOFPOF
    BADANGGG!!!

  36. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    There are plenty of other examples. Some of them have even managed to
    rack up very high body counts (even by Nazi or Stalinist standards).
    They're less exciting because they represent much more regional problems
    and offer little if any threat to the US of A.

    That said: A nutbag like Chavez is a little more interesting because you
    can flee his little dictatorship on foot and end up in Arizona or Texas.

    Wackos in the same neighborhood are more meaningful than ones on the other side of the planet.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  37. I blame Mercenaries 2: World In Flames by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mercenaries 2 took place in venezuela and was met with alot of criticism by the goverment. Apparently, they were more upset then anyone realized, eh?

  38. Instead of a "guns for toys" exchange . . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    100,000 AK-103's

    . . . they're planning a "violent video games for guns" exchange.

    Hell, an AK-103? Where do I trade my games in?

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  39. An age-old argument by Stenchwarrior · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do violent video games make kids more violent? Well, I never used to think so until my 6 year old started playing them. Almost immediately we noticed a change in his behavior and an increase in his aggressiveness. I fought it for a long time because I have been playing violent games since Doom and Quake and I totally didn't want to believe it...plus, I had always wanted my son to be able to play those games with me. So, after many arguments with my wife, and after strict guidance from his pediatrician, I caved and we put up the games. he HATED it but, I must admit, the temper tantrums ceased and he became a much more calm and respectful kid.

    I know what you are thinking: "He stopped because he was playing too many games in general". No, actually we only cut out the violent games. He still plays the games that, whoever that legal group is that decides what is ok for kids to play, say it's ok for him to play. It sucks because I never wanted to be that guy, but here I am. I guess I need to hang up my Logitech Mouseman and get a trackball because I'm certainly only months away from carpal tunnel.

    FML

    --
    Loading...
    1. Re:An age-old argument by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      There are many ways to solve conflicts. Violence is one way. Its no surprise that when shown primarily one way of solving conflicts, they will chose that option. Plus, there are many levels of violence and age groups. While Halo might be a bit too much for a 6 year old, my guess is an 8 or 9 year old would be able to handle it fine. Similarly, other games that use violence as the primary means of conflict resolution but don't use it exclusively such as RPGs would be perfectly fine, even ones with slight blood and violent imagery when in fights.

      But when it comes down to it, everyone is different. I mean, there are some kids who I think are more mature than some of my coworkers, and other kids who act like they are 3 when they are much older. There is no doubt that some 6 year olds can handle violent games fine, some don't. But I think the primary flaw is that they blame -everything- on video games, the same effects can happen with TV, Movies, Books, the news, etc. And it is simply tyranny to ban free speech, and without a doubt video games are free speech.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:An age-old argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You let your 6-year-old play violent video games? What's wrong with you? That's an age at which fantasy and real life are hard to differentiate! I don't think the games are the problem here...

    3. Re:An age-old argument by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      While we're busy treating anecdotes as scientific fact I'd just like to throw my two cents out there.

      When I was younger and discovered video games I noticed that I became less aggressive, despite playing 'violent' games such as Doom. I found that these games and the ability to take out destructive frustrations from other areas in my life actually made me more mellow. I wasn't terribly aggressive or violent to begin with which may have had some influence on my behavior. Even today if I'm feeling stressed and angry, I've found the video games can help me to release some of that frustration.

      If you're kid can't play violent video games without taking on some of their violent tendencies, it's probably best that he doesn't play them. It's probably best that you did the responsible thing as a parent to take them away, regardless of his protests. Of course, that doesn't mean that every child is the same or that because some people are unable to handle the content that it should be taken away from everyone. A few religious fanatics have blown up buildings but we don't see any politicians suggesting that we ban the Bible or Quran.

      Maybe he just needs to mature a little bit more before he's ready to handle games with violent themes. It's probably important that he learn to be able to consume content containing violence without becoming more violent himself as there's a lot of it out in the world and he'll have to learn to deal with it some day.

    4. Re:An age-old argument by acid06 · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't believe violent video games will harm a 12-year-old.
      However, I think you really did something wrong by letting a 6-year-old play a violent game.

      At that point, it could *really* harm kids. Let them play it after they're eleven or tweleve. You din't play Doom when you were 6.

    5. Re:An age-old argument by Landshark17 · · Score: 1

      If you've got a six year old son and you've been playing violent games since Doom, it's fair to assume that you already had a well-developed concept of right vs wrong and appropriate behavior when you started playing. Six-year-olds don't have that, their world is so small that anything you add to it will affect their idea of "normal." Any movie or game you expose them to that has identifiably human characters will affect what they think normal human behavior should be. If they see aggressive video game characters, they'll emulate that. I started playing violent games long before age six (my second-earliest memory of childhood is beating the demo of Wolfenstein 3d), but my parents always made sure to re-inforce a clear distinction between entertainment and reality. I don't mean to call you an incompetent parent, (infact I strongly support taking the violent games away and standing by that through tantrums, it sounds like it worked out in the end) I've seen the "it didn't affect me, why should it affect my kid?" idea blind-side a lot of people. I know nothing about your parenting style, but you might consider using the violent games as a reward for good behavior, ie "Show me you can behave well and then you can play this game. Misbehave, and I'll take it away."

      --
      This sig is false.
  40. Even "Red Alert III?" by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

    What even "Red Alert III?" Say it ain't so Hugo, say it ain't so.

    On the plus side, these kinds of Social Controls never work, and will ultimately lead to the collapse of the Venezualan state. It's akin to the Soviet Union outlawing "decadent Western culture," and shows Hugo Chavez to be the petty tin-plated tyrant his critics had always painted him as.

    --
    "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    1. Re:Even "Red Alert III?" by Targen · · Score: 1

      I noticed something funny when I played RA3. I can't find any screenshots of it, though. You know the little picture of a victorious conscript you're shown when you win a soviet mission? The conscript's face is eerily similar to Chavez's. Perhaps someone here can link to a screenshot. :)

  41. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

    Isolationism DOES NOT WORK.

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  42. As an American who has been to Caracas, Venezuela by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Chavez is a sick egotistical freak. I don't think he needs to be shot, per se, but he does need to be removed from power. Unfortunately, democracy is dead and the people cannot remove him with votes due to corruption.

    Those people are quickly losing all their freedoms in a way that makes citizens of the United States appear to be crying about nothing. Americans are so incredibly self-absorbed that we tend to put our own problems above anyone else.

    In Caracas, you can't stop at red lights at night due to the high probability of getting mugged. Friends can't stop by and talk for a few minutes in the street. You need to go behind a gate for your subdivision or apartment.

    The police are corrupt. People working in any government industry are corrupt and since most industries are being socialized this is almost every industry at this point. I got ripped off $150 USD at the airport by trusting an official worker when I found myself trying to leave without the appropriate exit tax.

    The saddest part is that Venezuelans are beautiful people with good hearts. To me they are ideal for the type of people I'd like to be surrounded by. They have traditional values and take care of each other. Most of them are trying to gain citizenship elsewhere.

  43. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

    Venezuela is not Mexico. You have to cross the Panama canal, and few other countries to get to the US from Venezuela. One even goes from South America to North America.

  44. Loki @ Work by mindbrane · · Score: 1

    Loki, the sinister Nordic God, speaks with a forked tongue in these matters. Sinister people, the word denoting left handedness, are known for their shadowy presence and ability to mettle in the affairs of others without ever being brought to justice. Bugs Bunny is an excellent representation of the type. Tribal shamanism carries overtones of word magic. Word magic believes action can be engendered, spookily and at a distance, by symbol manipulation. Thus words like fuck are forbidden in certain circles. It a psychotic delusional system that stems from shame based tribal societies where shame or guilt is tied to ideation arising from spiritual pollution. If you banish the guilty and their images you rid yourself of pollution

    The interesting part, that all societies seem to willfully ignore, is the part played by the wily "successful" people in modern society. We still overvalue image and presence. People, especially political leaders, who can wield powerful symbols are, ridiculously, seen as powerful. The suit and tie, the winning smile, the self effacing embrace of the world media are nearly ubiquitous by such types. The problems arise when they're able to enslave a population in a mass delusion symbolic, shamanistic war with the symbols of evil and the most animalistic and base of our instincts overcome common sense and advancement.

    --
    ideopath @ play
  45. Wait... by moredots · · Score: 1

    They have video games in Venezuela?

  46. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    With Chavez's help, Obama is trying to do the same to Honduras.

    Per the Honduran Constitution:

    Article 239 - No citizen that has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President.

    Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.

    Gee, you'd think trying to hold a referendum on removing Presidential term limits violates that? Just a tad?

  47. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by ravenshrike · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, for countries that we just invade officially, our track record is damned good at 3.5 out of 4(Afghanistan is ongoing and is hampered by the conduct of our allies' troops.). It is only countries that we try to interfere with through subterfuge or 'police actions' that our record fails.

  48. The trompo by Anonymous+Cowar · · Score: 1

    A Trompo is a toy popular in Latin America much like a top. Its name can vary between countries. In Spain it is known as "Peonza". Trompos have a pear-shaped body and are usually made of wood, although new resins and strong plastic materials have also been used.

    The trompo seen in this picture is exactly like a top which has been made in Sasebo, Japan for hundreds of years. It is believed that the tops used in Mexico were brought over from Japan. In Japan the name for a top is called a Koma. Most cities in Japan have a particular design for their koma.

    A trompo has a button-shaped tip on top, usually bigger than the tip on which trompo spins, and generally made of the same material as the rest of the body. This tip exists so that the trompo can spin on the metal-made tip when thrown.

    from you know where

    Hmm, you learn something new every day. I've been playing with tops (not the kinds you spin with your thumb and finger, but wrap a string around and chuck) for a long time and always thought that they were "tops", not trompo or koma.

    The more you know! {insert rainbow graphic and chimes}

    P.S. I played with tops (trompo), yo-yo's, and 'the nintendo' and I only turned out semi-egotistical, semi-individualistic, and semi-violent. Maybe there is something to this 'the nintendo' that turns kids to 'the violent'. I'm gonna go to 'the store' and possibly pick up some 'the batman' comics, then off to 'the arcade' to play 'the nintendo'. Ok, i'm having too much fun with the 'Hugo Quotes', I'll quit now.

    1. Re:The trompo by geekoid · · Score: 1
      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:The trompo by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

      Back in the days of the Super Nintendo (incidentally, one of the things I do know about South America is they tend to be way behind the US technologically and things like SNESs and Genesiss were still selling well there...) I worked in a Software, Etc.

      Well, one day this woman, a "soccer mom"-type came in, and she was seething with pent-up rage. She felt angry that her son wanted a "Nintendo," which she considered violent and evil. She said, "I don't want him playing this garbage" and pointed at a copy of Sonic Blastman that happened to catch her eye on a nearby shelf.

      Well, I said, "Do you have a computer?" She indicated that she did. I said "Well here, just get him Mario Teaches Typing" or maybe it was Mario is Missing, I forget, and ushered her out of the store...

      Now, imagine that woman as a South American Dictator....

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
  49. Re:this needs to be addressed by Xanavi · · Score: 1

    Where else do I complain that might get a popular following except inside a story?

  50. Zing! by billlava · · Score: 1

    I guess all those violent gangs in Venezuela are addicted to video games.

    Venezuela is known as a breeding ground for video game cartels and illegal video game smugglers. Some of the games you get from there aren't even pure. I've even heard that they get young girls addicted to video games and then force them into prostitution just so they can keep playing GTA 4.

    If only they could be a productive, viceless South American country, like Colombia.

  51. Word this, word that... by Millennium · · Score: 1

    Dude, have you been reading too much timecube.com or something?

    1. Re:Word this, word that... by mindbrane · · Score: 1

      Uhmmm, no, don't know what that is but I'll check it out. My posts are mostly just me fidgeting. After a ~3 year hiatus I'm back on /. because I've 3 large (for me) projects on the go and whenever that happens I start to fidget. Sorry, but it's probably gonna go one for the next 18 months or so, then, I'll disappear again. Best just to ignore me.

      --
      ideopath @ play
  52. No one likes the VZ by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    I mean, they ban video games that are violent and that just honks off the Pirates, Universal Petroleum and PLAV.

  53. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by cyber-dragon.net · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The people of Germany and Japan did this and succeeded DESPITE US interference, not because of it.

    They wanted it to begin with and we opened the door for them. This is very different than the too many to mention examples of where the US meddled and it was not wanted and nothing changed, and in a few cases got worse.

    Remember... Sadam was installed by the US as well :)

  54. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    So you think installing brutal dictators like the Shah in Iran is a good idea? Please explain why.

  55. excellent opportunity by geekoid · · Score: 1

    let's see if violent crime drops.

    Yes, it would only be corrollary, but interesting to note.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  56. Consequences and repercussions by ShagratTheTitleless · · Score: 1

    The cost of freedom is responsibility for ones self. The Venezuelans stopped paying and I'm afraid we are making only minimum payments ourselves. Fuck.

    --
    Sometimes at night I imagine the darkness is filled with horrible things with too many teeth, like Julia Roberts.
  57. Piensas de los niños! by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's tragic. South America was always such a peaceful place before those damned video games came in!

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Piensas de los niños! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, great point. Violent video games create violence. Therefore, before the invention of video games, violence didn't exist.

      So, therefore, any violent act mentioned in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Venezuela must be totally false, thus proving that wikipedia cannot be trusted.

    2. Re:Piensas de los niños! by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      You better believe it. Personally I used to be sceptical over such claims, but only this week here in the UK, the Video Recordings Act 1984 was found to have never been enacted. Well I tell you what - it's the end of civilization here. Just as MP Barbara Follett feared as she suggested censoring the news about the law not being valid, the market has been flooded with unclassified DVDs, and it's led to crime rates going through the roof, with rioting up and down the country.

      I tried to pop into my local video store to see if I could get hold of a copy of one of these "video nasty" snuff films that are now on sale, but couldn't fight my way past the horde of children who were purchasing hardcore porn, and immediately afterwards as a result, they started raping each other. Apparently the porn that they download for free on the Internet just doesn't have the same effect on them. Me, I was lucky to get out alive.

      This is a national emergency. The Government has been handing emergency "blinkers", so that adult citizens can go about their daily business, whilst minimising the risk that they might see a non-Government approved image and then turn into a criminal.

      And all this comes after the UK experienced 7 months of not a single incident of violent crime, thanks to Liz Longhurst who single-handedly criminalised possession of adult porn that she doesn't like. Let's hope the Government remembered to tell Europe about that law, otherwise I don't think there will be anyone left alive.

    3. Re:Piensas de los niños! by Saija · · Score: 1

      hehe is "piensa en los niños", that "de" word seems horrible in the phrase to us spanish speakers.. :)

      --
      Slashdot ya no es que lo era! ;)
    4. Re:Piensas de los niños! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's tragic. South America was always such a peaceful place before those damned video games came in!

      I'm afraid you are slightly mistaken, South America was a peaceful place before the Yankee CIA started to create revolutions to take out democratically elected descent governments and putting in their place right wing yankee-ass-kissers that did not mind killing their own people for money. Venezuela has reasons to buy all those weapons as the northern neighbor (the US) is in the habit of invading countries to steal petrol

    5. Re:Piensas de los niños! by xtracto · · Score: 1

      It's tragic. South America was always such a peaceful place before those damned video games came in!

      Yeah, that surely was before USA got his nose into Latin America. Read it, it is quite insightful. Oh! but it is in Spanish :(

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    6. Re:Piensas de los niños! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah Games like SNK vs CAPCOM or Nixon Vs Soviet , those games carried a lot of violence direct to the streets.

    7. Re:Piensas de los niños! by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. The U.S. went there to bring them freedom and apple pie. They should thank us for such a wonderful gift.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  58. citation needed by Targen · · Score: 1

    I'll bite despite obvious offtopicness that makes me cringe (if only because the parent -somehow- made it to score 2).

    How about some credible evidence of CIA involvement in ANY public protest in Venezuela during, say, the last 10 years? Emphasis on "credible": ridiculous conspiracy theories and other random youtube bullshit about magic snipers don't quite pass the test, especially considering the very clear video footage we all saw on live TV of the Chavista thugs shooting freely down at the march from the bridge.

    1. Re:citation needed by floop · · Score: 5, Interesting
      That didn't happen. It was faked by the TV station that was actively taking part in the coup attempt and picked up by CNN, et. al. to support the US position on the coup.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_chavez#Ch.C3.A1vez_and_the_media

      Now I know you're saying "that just wikipedia" but maybe read the cites. Or do a google search. Educate your self. You might find that the US government has done far worse in acting out foreign policy goals... And publicly acknowledged it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_sponsored_regime_change. Almost as bad as the Brits.

      But I understand your need to deny anything that the US does that could be construed as bad since this might force you to take personal responsibility for your own life.

    2. Re:citation needed by Targen · · Score: 1, Informative
      It's funny that you refer to the media like that, since the Chavez government has come rather close to exterminating independent media in this country. The RESORTE law is used for blatant censorship, RCTV (the oldest still existing TV network in this country, dating back to the 50s, and only the second private station) was shut down to silence their strong criticism of Chavez and his movement, and just a few weeks ago 34 radio stations were ordered to stop transmitting over some bullshit bureaucratic issue, and this just happened to include CNB, a widely spread radio network that broadcasts the most popular anti-Chavez political commentary radio/TV show (now off the air, of course, but continues on TV), Alo Ciudadano.

      I'm well aware of what US foreign policy towards Latin America was like during the cold war. The cold war is over. Granted, there's no telling what conspiracy theorists will claim, but the coup was evidently a military action, and it's funny to note how Lucas Rincon Romero, the highest-ranking general at the time of the coup who spearheaded it and famously announced Chavez's resignation, ended up being minister of interior and justice and is now the Venezuelan ambassador to Portugal. Funny thing, that.

      But I understand your need to deny anything that the US does that could be construed as bad since this might force you to take personal responsibility for your own life.

      I'm Venezuelan, just in case you were assuming otherwise. It's quite odd, too, that you believe I see no wrong in anything the US does, seeing as I've implied no such thing; in fact, I hate the US's drug war, I hate US support for Israel, I hate the war in Iraq, I hate almost everything the Republican party represents and a lot of what the Democratic party represents, I hate all of the shenanigans of the Bush administration, and so on and on, ad nauseum. This has absolutely nothing, not a thing, to do with the fact that the coup against Chavez was strictly an action by the Venezuelan military as has always been throughout our long history of coups that dates back about as far as our independence.

    3. Re:citation needed by Zombywuf · · Score: 1, Informative

      To put the above in perspective, the above poster is clearly rich enough to a) afford a TV b) afford a connection to the internet. The coup against Chavez was organised by the rich, and defeated by the poor. The TV stations he mentions are all for the rich, so champion low taxes and screwing poor people, basically it's Fox on every channel. The one that got shut down openly advocated the coup. That's like Fox championing freepers marching to the Whitehouse with guns, the FCC would have failed to renew Fox's license if they went that far.

      As for the claim of Chavez thugs shooting at peaceful protesters, there are other camera angles showing 3 guys trying to suppress fire from automatic rifles with handguns while women and children (Chavez's thugs remember) scurry for safety because the anti Chavez crowd thinks it's their right to shoot poor people.

      --
      If you can read this you've gone too far.
    4. Re:citation needed by floop · · Score: 1

      I apologize for assuming you were from the US. I'm really curious what is with all the hate against Chavez from your perspective? Not the part about how he's censoring stuff or acting like a dictator. But what about his policies is so offensive to you or the significant part of the population that support a coup would seem like a good idea?

    5. Re:citation needed by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Emphasis on "credible": ridiculous conspiracy theories and other random youtube bullshit about magic snipers don't quite pass the test, especially considering the very clear video footage we all saw on live TV of the Chavista thugs shooting freely down at the march from the bridge.

      You must be living in Venezuela, because in the US we didn't get to see live footage (except for the one that showed George W Bush saying that Chavez "deserved it", when the news of the coup was still just coming out, and we still all thought that the coup had succeeded). In any case, youtube has videos of both sides of the conflict. And since you're living in Venezuela (I assume), you should actually have an easier time than me in seeing which videos are true.

      ridiculous conspiracy theories

      Come on, don't you find it suspicious that the CIA operative who was in charge of the rebel death squads in Nicaragua during the Iran-Contra scandal became the US ambassador to Venezuela? And don't you find is suspicious that the president of the chamber of commerce suddenly believes one day that he's the new supreme leader of Venezuela? There was a conspiracy alright, there was an attempted coup after all. It's just that we're disagreeing on the nature of the conspiracy, and some of the main players involved.

      Here, here is what happened on April 8th, three days before the attempted coup (notice that I'm linking to Forbes magazine, a magazine that is no friend of Chavez). The theory on Wall Street is that Hugo Chavez nationalized the oil fields, replaced its board of directors, and halted the export of oil from Venezuela (in collusion with Saddam Hussein who halted oil production in Iraq at the exact same time). Furthermore, and you'll have to forgive my lack of sourcing for all these conjectures (you certainly don't have to believe me if you don't want to). The idea is that Hugo Chavez knew that he was triggering the CIA coup against himself by doing this, but he did it anyway because that allowed him to predict the time, the date, and the location of the coup (in other words, he was following the exact same game plan that Fidel Castro had used for the Bay of Pigs).

      And what the Irish documentary did not show was the real reason the coup failed. It was not just the fact that the people outside the palace asked for Chavez back, it was that Hugo Chavez had hidden a large contingent of loyal guards under the palace all along. And when the new self-selected "government" came to the palace, it came right into the trap Hugo Chavez had set for them (it was not the palace guards that took back the palace, it was the guards that were hidden underneath it that did it).

    6. Re:citation needed by Targen · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I would think it's plenty enough to censor stuff (shut down TV channels and radio stations, organize and fund party-associated armed gangs and order them to attack journalists) and act like a dictator (completely politicize every public institution in the country, taking over every power of the state by eliminating all dissent, literally purging thousands of people from public companies and institutions (PDVSA, the entire court system, universities, the central bank...)) to be offended by his policies. There's also the massive amounts of corruption, massive handouts to political allies elsewhere in Latin America (including FARC, of course), incessant warmongering with Colombia (to the point of militarizing the border), economic policy that you wouldn't even laugh at as a joke (7 years and counting of foreign currency exchange restrictions, two year long waiting lists to buy incredibly overpriced cars, monetizing huge amounts of money to fund the military (which has been turned into an arm of the Chavista party)), spiraling urban violence (in 2006 we hit an estimated 160 murders per 100k inhabitants in Caracas!), violent repression of peaceful dissent (watch videos from how just about any opposition march ends!), huge databases of opponents used to purge public institutions of anyone who dares sign a petition for a referendum against Chavez (google for Tascon's list)...

      I could literally spend all night typing here. Do ask if you're interested; there's a lot of misinformation going around because Chavez has succeeded in pushing an image of Venezuela being a socialist paradise to left-leaning people all across the world. And it's all bullshit: Chavez has not a bit of socialism in him. His political movement is an authoritarian personalism; it pretends to be nationalism, but the blindly worshipped figure of our nation is whatever Chavez himself whims it to be on any given day/week/month/campaign.

    7. Re:citation needed by alantus · · Score: 0

      As for the claim of Chavez thugs shooting at peaceful protesters, there are other camera angles showing 3 guys trying to suppress fire from automatic rifles with handguns while women and children (Chavez's thugs remember) scurry for safety because the anti Chavez crowd thinks it's their right to shoot poor people.

      I've seen the videos of the Chavez thugs shooters a thousand times. The cameraman that shot it even got a Prince of Asturias award.
      Even with all this evidence, these shooters are currently free. Venezuela's judicial system is a complete joke.

      On the other hand, 11 people for which there is no proof of guilt were imprisoned without conviction, and are rotting in prison ever since.
      I'm talking about Ivan Simonovis, Henry Vivas, Lazaro Forero, etc.

    8. Re:citation needed by Targen · · Score: 0
      The reasons the coup failed are indeed far closer to what you mentioned than to the silly romantic notion of a massive group of Chavez supporters taking over the Miraflores palace and forcing the new government out (which in turn is about as ridiculous as the idea some Chavez supporters have of the coup having been carried out by hordes of opposition protesters and such; in reality, it was strictly a military matter from start to finish: part of the military carried out the coup, and another part of the military reversed it).

      The theory on Wall Street is that Hugo Chavez nationalized the oil fields, replaced its board of directors, and halted the export of oil from Venezuela (in collusion with Saddam Hussein who halted oil production in Iraq at the exact same time).

      The problem this theory is that it's simply not how things happened. A three-day strike and halt on production was declared by PDVSA executives and several of its unions against Chavez's various policies regarding the (state-owned yet still supposed to run autonomously) oil company. In response to this, Chavez announced on live national TV the firings of every high-level executive of PDVSA and several other state-owned companies associated to it that also participated in the strike (no big deal, you might think, but it's estimated some 6000 workers were fired in the later months for the sole reason of having taken part in the strike, and many more were later purged after the greater strike of 2002-2003 and when Tascon's list came around). The halt in production was in protest against Chavez and was the cause of the takeover, naturally predating it. Not the other way around.

  59. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

    I'm glad there are all those other countries trying to support the "good guys." you know. like cuba, russia, china, france.

  60. haha~ oh wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pray tell me, how exactly buying whatever fighters, assault rifles and tanks you like comes together with banning certain videogames?

    Or was it just your media-zombified mind at work?

  61. Who posted this?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who actually post this??? Oh wait some turd maybe living in Miami with the money he robbed from Venezuela.

    C'mon, i live in Venezuela, yes there is crime, in what country does crime does not exist...

    Venezuela had an outdated defense... Chavez knows this because he was part of the army..

    I love Venezuela and Hugo Chavez is no Dictator.

  62. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Becasue leaders like this actively work against us?
    Our track record is pretty good, btw.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  63. Govt self preservation by Haxzaw · · Score: 1

    I assert that this is the government trying to protect itself. A citizenry that is armed, or even unarmed, and has a clue as to how to defend itself or create a revolution is a threat to a government bent on total control. Citizens playing Tetris or Solitaire wouldn't know what to do when confronted with the need to wield a weapon, but a citizen playing a first person shooter would have a leg up when it comes to weapons use. A totalitarian government cannot allow its citizens to be more than mindless automotons.

    1. Re:Govt self preservation by CompMD · · Score: 1

      "a citizen playing a first person shooter would have a leg up when it comes to weapons use."

      Yep, to fire, all they have to do is click. They really can carry nine large weapons and all the ammunition for them on their person. And when they empty a mag, they just need to shoot off to the side to reload.

      I own several weapons and have been trained in the use of even more. Video games don't teach you *anything* about how to handle a weapon.

    2. Re:Govt self preservation by Haxzaw · · Score: 1

      I have to disagree. I also own several weapons, and I learned to shoot long before computers were ever "personal", but surely you would agree there's a certain amount of hand eye coordination involved, and surely one could collect some knowledge of gunsights from a video game. Understanding recoil, loading, clearing, etc probably would not be learned from a game, but the coordination and sight issues could be. The main problem may be that the citizen would expect to take several hits before he loses a life, and that's a lesson you only learn once.

    3. Re:Govt self preservation by CompMD · · Score: 1

      I will give you that hand-eye coordination is something important, but that is not specific to weapon handling or target sighting. At best though, someone could learn rudimentary knowledge of sights from a game, as its all a 2D screen. When you have a 9 lb. rifle in your hands on a hot day, and you're trying to sight your target 200m away through a peep sight, video game dynamics are out the window. I know that on a nasty day like that, even I have trouble at long range with just the iron sights on my HK91.

      Pistol shooting is even worse. How you tense your hands, the muscles in your strong arm, and how you pull the trigger all effect your accuracy. People don't think about these things, and there's no way a video game can account for them.

    4. Re:Govt self preservation by Haxzaw · · Score: 1

      Points taken, and I'm in agreement. Your phrase "rudimentary knowledge" is exactly what I was trying to get across, but I did it poorly. I'd also say that a Government would rather rule pacifists and sheep, so people who play violent games may have a tendancy to be outside the governments' model of an ideal citizen.

    5. Re:Govt self preservation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citizens playing Tetris or Solitaire wouldn't know what to do when confronted with the need to wield a weapon, but a citizen playing a first person shooter would have a leg up when it comes to weapons use.

      ...Not much of a leg up. Maintaining and using a weapon in the real world isn't as easy as a middle click reload. Couch potatoes are also notoriously large targets that are often slow moving. Environmental effects such as windage and bullet arc are often not accounted for in video games, either. Have fun missing the fascists and getting perforated with lead. I submit that the only way to have a leg up with weapons is to... train with weapons. Video games on the other hand are great for hand-eye coordination, and also wasting an afternoon or evening.

  64. Chavez is a clown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the only think lacking is the big red nose and the orange hair. he's got the rest of the act spot on.

  65. Chevez the Shepherd? by Eil · · Score: 1

    Chavez promoted the use of traditional toys like the Yo-Yo and Trompo, and suggested that electronic toys like 'the Nintendo' be put aside because they promote 'egoism, individualism and violence.'

    Yup, can't have people acting like individuals, now can we?

  66. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Targen · · Score: 1

    Obama's doing what he needs to do. Anything less and he'd be accused of perpetuating the terrible foreign policy of the US to Latin America that existed during the cold war. It doesn't mean the accusations are anything less than ridiculous, but there is no other politically viable course of action for Obama considering his foreign policy ideas (or, at the very least, the impression he wishes to give about his foreign policy ideas).

  67. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    I didn't say it was EASY. The fact that it is very difficult doesn't keep it from happening.

    Border traffic between Mexico and the US isn't just limited to Mexicans.

    Plus Chavez seeks to be more influential with all the countries in between.

    Although the difficulty in hitchhiking across the Western Hemisphere isn't quite the point.

    That same route can be traveled by better equipped travellers.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  68. Jeebus what a steaming pile... by orzetto · · Score: 0, Troll

    That's the most propagandistic summary I have seen in a while. Chávez has been democratically elected and Venezuela has a freer press than Colombia, Mexico, Pakistan and other US allies, including puppet governments like Iraq and Afghanistan where the US could simply tell the leaders to enact laws and impose freedom of the press by decree. Not only that, TV stations actively collaborated with a coup d'état against Chávez, and instead of rounding up the criminals and sending them to jail or to the firing squad, he left them in place, and waited for the licence of one station to expire.

    I do not agree with this law in principle, but this is not any different than what we have over here in Germany; for instance, Fallout 3 was heavily censored (no blood in Fallout 3. Seriously.), the other day I saw Apocalypto on TV and have seen almost no gore. I suppose I will torrent down the original version at some later time to see what the fuss was about.

    What worries me is that I am seeing a replay of 2003 here: someone is whipping up unjustified hate for a foreign leader and disproportionally criticising every move of his; only, this time it's not a dictator (no matter what some elitist Venezuelan right-wing moochers who never worked in their lives may say), it is a man who won elections legitimately multiple times; he called for a referendum to amend the constitution, lost, and respected the vote and went on to another referendum to push his reforms through, he did not simply adjust the numbers or print trick ballots like Jeb Bush did in 2000.

    I do not think Chávez is the second coming of Christ (he is not diplomatically savvy, not fighting corruption enough, and shows like Aló presidente are really cheesy), but I see you Americans going into Saddam-Hussein mode again. I am fed up with you starting wars and making life miserable for everybody else, and so is the rest of the globe. Please don't waste the PR capital you made by electing a guy with a brain for a change.

    Uh, and guess what: Venezuela has oil. Maybe that has something to do with all that focus? Try putting your military money into energy research and maybe that will have a better payoff. And get off my lawn.

    --
    Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    1. Re:Jeebus what a steaming pile... by Targen · · Score: 2

      That's the most propagandistic summary I have seen in a while. Chávez has been democratically elected and Venezuela has a freer press than Colombia, Mexico, Pakistan and other US allies, including puppet governments like Iraq and Afghanistan where the US could simply tell the leaders to enact laws and impose freedom of the press by decree. Not only that, TV stations actively collaborated with a coup d'état against Chávez, and instead of rounding up the criminals and sending them to jail or to the firing squad, he left them in place, and waited for the licence of one station to expire.

      I've spent the better part of this afternoon commenting here and there in this article and I'm exhausted, so I'll be brief, although I'd certainly prefer to reply more extensively.
      I don't know anything, to be honest, about the situation regarding press freedoms in Colombia, Pakistan and Mexico. However, it's ridiculous to imply journalism is just fine* and dandy down here.

      Furthermore, I'm curious: how, exactly, does a TV station collaborate with a military coup?

      * you have to select "Venezuela" in the combo box here to get the listing.

    2. Re:Jeebus what a steaming pile... by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, I'm curious: how, exactly, does a TV station collaborate with a military coup?

      The same reason the military would put the president of the chamber of commerce as the new head of state. It makes no sense unless you thought the military was taking orders from the CIA. And the CIA certainly has the track record of using television stations and radio stations to foment coups. Honduras and Guatemala are just two such well-known and documented examples (I'm sure there are more).

      The media is just one of the tools used in psychological warfare.

    3. Re:Jeebus what a steaming pile... by Targen · · Score: 1

      Lucas Rincon Romero, the highest-ranking general in the history of the modern Venezuelan armed forces (his rank was, in fact, -created- just for him, although I do believe there's another general now with that rank) announces in the first bits of this video* that the high command of the military (the generals in charge of each branch of the military and the minister of defense, IIRC) requested the president's resignation, which, according to him, Chavez accepted. I guess that makes this general a CIA agent or the like, according to your conspiracy theory; why is it, then, that this same general ended up being minister of interior and justice, and is now our ambassador to Portugal?

      If you're going to push a conspiracy theory, at least get the right conspiracy. I don't believe in either, but you're simply way off course; sometimes countries do stupid shit without the US being behind it.


      * Only one I could find with the whole statement by Lucas Rincon. Ignore the rest of the video if you must.

    4. Re:Jeebus what a steaming pile... by orzetto · · Score: 1

      I did not say all was "fine and dandy", I simply pointed out how harsh criticism is aimed at Chávez while worse offenders are left alone only because they either have no oil or they do not challenge the US.

      how, exactly, does a TV station collaborate with a military coup?

      By doctoring, spinning, and misreporting information. In particular, TV stations:

      • Showed a picture of Chávez supporters with a gun, claiming they were shooting at an opposition rally; they weren't, they were answering fire coming from the road below the bridge (that's why they are all seeking cover in the picture); besides, the road was devoid of people.
      • Reported that Chávez had resigned, whereas he had not;
      • Generally relayed the military junta's propaganda in Pravda style.

      There is a nice documentary about that, "The revolution will not be televised". It's not a product of the Venezuelan government, it was made by Irish journalists on site at the time of the events. In fact, the Venezuelan attempted coup was one in which TV stations played a particularly prominent role.

      --
      Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
  69. It's just a plot.. by MaerD · · Score: 1

    To make sure none of their citizenry plays "Mercenaries 2" and try to overthrow the gov't.

    --
    I put on my robe and wizard hat..
  70. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever heard of Germany or Japan?

    In the next breath I suppose we should fire bomb them or nuke 'em. That always makes for good freinds.

  71. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Venezuela currently is an Ochlocracy or Government by Mob.

    Chavez, an ex Colonel who directed a coup attempt in 1992, has used his victory in elections to do whatever he wants, ignoring laws and the Constitution with the excuse that he's "backed by a majority". He pretty much governs the country like a military base, organizing his followers in "patrols" and encouraging them in national television to "destroy" and "pulverize" the political opposition. The National Assembly is all in the hands of his party and concedes his desires unconditionally. The courts, judges and police are used to bully and harrass the opposition, while cases against government figures are ignored, denied or permanently delayed. Demonstrations against his goverment are repressed by a combination of police, military and paramilitary groups of his followers.

    This is just another step in a long series toward a totalitarian regime, in the best Animal Farm or 1984 style. Socialism will be the only way of life and El Presidente's will the only allowed.

  72. Gangs? by mu51c10rd · · Score: 1

    I guess all those violent gangs in Venezuela are addicted to video games.

    Addicted to Grand Theft Auto?

  73. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Toonol · · Score: 1

    The reaction to the situation in Honduras is mind-boggling. I disagree with Obama quite a bit, but I believe he is certainly a smart fellow. Yet there is absolutely NO way to look at the situation in Honduras and think that Zelaya should be put back in power. He has no legal claim, no moral claim, and no practical claim to retaining leadership. Yet Obama, along with nearly every other major nation's leaders, are supporting him. Thankfully, the support is fairly tentative, not military. How does one get one's viewpoint so absolute ass-backwards?

  74. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama's doing what he needs to do. Anything less and he'd be accused of perpetuating the terrible foreign policy of the US to Latin America that existed during the cold war. It doesn't mean the accusations are anything less than ridiculous, but there is no other politically viable course of action for Obama considering his foreign policy ideas (or, at the very least, the impression he wishes to give about his foreign policy ideas).

    Bullshit. Utter BULL SHIT. Obama could support this thing called "the rule of law". But no. Obama's supporting the leftist despite the laws of Honduras.

    In a case where all the political institutions of a country follow their pre-existing laws to remove a politician from power because he's defying the constitution, Obama supports the politician.

    If George W. Bush had attempted to subvert the US Constitution and remain in power past Jan 2009, would you have supported him?

    If not, why the fuck are you supportive of Zelaya and HIS attempt to subvert the Honduran Constitition?

  75. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by arielCo · · Score: 1

    Why can't we leave others alone and worry about problems in our own country?

    In the name of other /.-ers who are not US citizens or residents and my own, can you please define what you mean by "we"?

    --
    This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
  76. Mark Loyd & FCC by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

    Mark Loyd, Obama-appointed "Diversity" Czar at the FCC thinks Chavez' media polices are necessary & essential. There's video of Loyd discussing Chavez and his control of Venezuelan media. Look for the hammer to drop on free speech in US media, particularly talk radio and political-opinion shows.

    You've been warned.

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    1. Re:Mark Loyd & FCC by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Oops, I misspelled Czar Lloyd's name. Wouldn't want to disrespect a mans' name that has such respect for free and open speech.

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  77. Re:As an American who has been to Caracas, Venezue by Targen · · Score: 1

    Sadly, the idea that Venezuelans are beautiful people with good hearts isn't very accurate. It's certainly one of our traits to be jolly and easy-going and such, but corruption is just as fundamental a trait of our culture as our nicer hobbit bits are. You're spot-on on everything else you said, but you really don't want to be surrounded by venezuelans, at least not in positions of power. For precisely the same nice "taking care of each other" bit, we'll steal from those we count as "others" to provide for "ours". Especially if it means stealing from the state: the more people you're robbing, the less personal it feels.

  78. Some of you are blind by teamsleep · · Score: 0, Troll

    Really, those of you who are trying to defend Hugo Chavez and Venezuela as "better than America" get a real argument please. Hugo Chavez is the epitome of ridiculous power hungry dictators. He thinks Nintendo is a bad thing for promoting individualism? That's the first sign of a dictator who is trying to control every aspect of his citizen's lives.

    If anything he should be outlawing guns and making those illegal. If there's anything that promotes violence it's the guns that cause the violence. Or outlaw the gangs and cartels that cause ALL of the violence, kidnappings, and extortions. Come on, any of you who defend him. Are you serious? "He was democratically elected." Lol, really? He instills fear in his citizens to control them, bans certain items to control them but no he was "democratically elected" if that even means anything, which it doesn't. It means nothing, it just means his propaganda machine worked and he convinced people to elect him. Any of those people who supposedly 'voted' for him are brainwashed individuals who think he's some kind of saint with his God complex.

    "The people doing this are the United Socialist Party. Hugo Chavez is a champion of workers' rights, a bane to American-style capitalist corporations, heavily influenced by Marx, and a socialist to the core.

    He is also the democratically elected leader of his country."

    He's also the moron who called George W. Bush the 'devil' which was pretty funny when he said it, because it made him seem delusional and on the verge of sociopathic.

    1. Re:Some of you are blind by Cumanes-alpha · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I would exchange the 3 or 4 of the blind people who posted here for the 4 millions blind pigs that voted this pig in the elections. Several (A LOT) of people vote here under the pressure that if they don't vote for chavez they won't keep their jobs, of course, all of them work for the government and the nationalized industries (which everyday are more and more: oil-PDVSA, telecommunications-CANTV-MOVILNET, several basic industries, etc.) I don't understand anymore that excuse that Chavez is "democratically elected": if you vote me for president, I have the rights to do whatever I like in despite of the consequences? instigate violence? prohibit everything I think is bad for me?. And just to let other people know, every other "power" here is controlled by the same party: judicial and legislative power are all servants of Chavez. We're trapped and doomed here. (Well, as I said before, I'm leaving)

  79. Did Chaves play too much Tropico as a child? by trout007 · · Score: 1

    That would explain it.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
  80. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Americans could ever get over the idea that it was only them 'installing democracy' what made Japan and Germany what they are today, they might actually understand why the approach didn't work for the last decades. Yeah, fat chance..

  81. Nobody needs, or should profit, from these sick vi by PetrBuben · · Score: 1

    No more profits for sick, violent, fascist crime celebrating and hooliganism violence culture teaching, which destroys young people morals and character. Should the most violent country in the world, the USA, do the same? Yes it should.

  82. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by lgw · · Score: 1

    Well, you'd have to limit your statement to "countries that we invade officially, and then win the fight". The Bay of Pigs invasion didn't do so well to promote democracy over communism, nor did the "invasion" of Vietnam. Korea I guess we get a "1/2" on.

    But, yeah, the stuff that the government keeps secret because the shit would hit the fan if the American people found out about it has a particularly embarassing track record. I was really hopeful when Bush was talking about making it official policy to stop doing the unofficial stuff (ha!), but everyone had stopped listening to him by then.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  83. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Targen · · Score: 1

    Hey, I don't support it. I'm glad they got rid of Zelaya; they saved themselves from having to go through what Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and several others are experiencing. Not only that, but they seem to be doing it right; Zelaya's not back yet, and it doesn't look like he'll be back. It remains to be seen whether this move will backfire come the november elections and end up producing some piece of shit politician that's even worse than Zelaya, but I give them plenty of credit for getting as far as they've gotten. I certainly wish our own military coup down here had been as successful as theirs seems to be.

    If your question is why the fuck would Obama be supportive of Zelaya, I don't think it can be denied that it's consistent with his general opposition to the US meddling in regime changes and the like. It'd be counterproductive in terms of his wishes to "restore the US's standing in the world" and such. Politics, politics, politics.

  84. Somebody who knows the score tagged it "fascism" by fnj · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hitler was also a champion of workers' and farmers' rights and was democratically elected, undeniably influenced (negatively) by Marx, and a socialist to the core. The "S" in NSDAP stood for socialist, you know. Here's a pop quiz. Can you briefly state the difference between fascist and socialist (minus any hyperbolae)? Hint: it's a trick question.

    As for "bane to American-style capitalist corporations", I simply think that Chavez simply favors his own corporations, state run or in cahoots with the state, as is the case with both socialism and fascism.

  85. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Afghanistan is ongoing and is hampered by the conduct of our allies' troops

    Clarify, please. Do you mean to offend the Brits, the French, the Germans, the Canadians, or all of the nations that I've listed that are covering the ass of your troops in Afghanistan while the latter are in Iraq?

  86. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Korea I guess we get a "1/2" on.

    U.S. didn't invade Korea. Korea was already split into North and South before the war, and North attacked and invaded South, prompting U.S. to defend it under UN mandate.

  87. Power... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "Any sufficiently far-left philosophy is indistinguishable from a far-right philosophy."

    That is because both philosophy is driven to its extreme by the same kind of person. Every society has a minority of people who seek power over everyone else, ultimately for their own gain. That has been true throughout human history and around the world. This minority's core psychology is to be very deeply driven to seek power over others, so they can decide for others and so gain from having such power over others.

    The question then becomes why are they so driven? What is it in their psychology that makes them so driven to seek power over others?. The answer is a disproportionate number of the people who fight to the top in politics have a Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Politics is a very competitive environment and a narcissist has a competitive advantage in such a competitive environment, so they naturally fight and manipulate their way to the top, at the expense of others. So Politics acts like a selection process filtering out non-narcissists so you end up with a dominance of narcissists. The more dominant the narcissists become in a party the worse they become. Narcissists lack empathy to others and as a result they have no problem lying to people to gets what they want. They even consider themselves better that other people for being able to con overly trusting people.

    Here's two examples quotes from a deeply NPD person who has had power for many years. They are quotes from Benito Mussolini
    (1) He wished to gain favor with Hitler and so when talking about his own people, he said:
    "I shall require a few thousand dead soldiers in order to secure my place as a belligerent leader - later, at the conference table"

    (2) When told his people were starting to stave and the ratios of food per person were getting low, he said:
    "I tell you that around spring time, the ratios will be even less and this delights me, because we will finally see signs of suffering, on the faces of Italian people, which will be valuable to us around the peace table."

    The thing with HPD's in such power is they don't usually want people to die. The point is they don't care if they live or die. They are thinking only about how the deaths of others affects them. How does it change their fortunes. How does it affect their position of power. How does it change how others think about them. They are thinking of themselves, how they gain. Hence they are truly and deeply Narcissistic.

    A Narcissistic is created by an intense desire to never again be dominated by others the way they were dominated and dictated to when they were a child. They are ultimately driven by that fear, but they would never admit that fear. Most would give any excuse other than admit their fear, because by admitting their fear, they fear they show weakness, which risks (they think) that others will exploit that sign of weakness to try to dominate them again. Its why politicians alway feel compelled to talk of strength yet behind so much of what they do, they actually show signs they are driven to defend against the fear of someone else gaining power over them.

    This is also why banning violent video games will not work. The violence in society is created by NPD's (and the even more extreme ASPD's, who thankfully (for us all) they are usually self destructive people so they don't (often) gain positions of power. ASPD people are too busy being angry at the world and having no empathy towards others. They can be thought of as extreme NPD's caused by the most extreme forms of abuse. They have gone beyond NPD into being ASPD).

    Once you learn to see its NPD and ASPD behavior behind violence in society, its easy to explain the violence. For example, imagine trying to tell an NPD to their face and in from of others that they are a coward. Imagine the hostility of their reaction as they seek to prove to you they are not a coward ... as they most likely try to beat you senseless. Of course, politicians have gained such po

  88. Are Americans being ethnocentric? by mc6809e · · Score: 3, Funny

    In America," Obama says, "we have this strong bias toward individual action. You know, we idolize the John Wayne hero who comes in to correct things with both guns blazing. But individual actions, individual dreams, are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations."

    - Barack Obama,
    Interview with the Chicago Reader, 1995

  89. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But Obama IS meddling:

    U.S. moves toward formal cut off of aid to Honduras

    WASHINGTON, Aug 27 (Reuters) - U.S. State Department staff have recommended that the ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya be declared a "military coup," a U.S. official said on Thursday, a step that could cut off as much as $150 million in U.S. funding to the impoverished Central American nation.

    The official, who spoke on condition he not be named, said State Department staff had made such a recommendation to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has yet to make a decision on the matter although one was likely soon.

    Washington has already suspended about $18 million aid to Honduras following the June 28 coup and this would be formally cut if the determination is made because of a U.S. law barring aid "to the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree." ...

    "The recommendation of the building is for her to sign it," said the first U.S. official said of the 'military coup" determination, saying this was a response to the de facto government's refusal to accept a compromise that would allow Zelaya to return to power ahead of November elections. (Editing by Jackie Frank)

    Geez, maybe the US needed to accept some sort of "compromise" back in 1973 to return Richard Nixon to power?!?!

    Good God, Zelaya was removed for trying to subvert the Presidential term limits in the Honduran Constition. The very clause that says anyone trying to remove must be removed from power. Every Honduran political institution worked deliberatively per Honduran law to remove Zelaya.

    And here's the Obama aministration saying Zelaya needs to be returned to power.

    WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!

    That's EXACTLY the very kind of "meddling" that you're saying Obama's opposed to.

    It sure doesn't look that way.

  90. "You Fragged FREEDOM" by Yousef · · Score: 1

    I suppose Hugo Chavez was a big gamer and wants to protect his people from his youthful mistakes...
    "You Fragged FREEDOM!"

    --
    -- "To ask a question is to show ignorance; Not to ask a question means you'll remain ignorant."
  91. Es que nadie piensa en los niños!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    South America isn't inherently violent. Some countries have violent governments, other have a big poverty problem, that is leading towards class fights, hence violence, and others are doing quite well. I doubt you have heard of Uruguay, but that is truly the "little country that could".

    Disclaimer: I'm from Argentina, not a violent country, but a really corrupt one, that has caused a lot of inequity in its society and caused that now any underage kid on PACO (some shit drug derivative of cocaine) stabs you for 40 pesos (10 US dollars, here you can buy a good meal on that, or pay a taxi to go cross Buenos Aires, one of the biggest cities on the continent).

  92. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by tecnico.hitos · · Score: 1

    It would be way better if USA stopped meddling with other countries affairs.

    USA doesn't have such good example of government to begin with. Wrecking a country and forcing it to follow "the American way" do little if any good, and leaves a scar.

    Stop boasting how good US government is for "liberating" other nations, because if anything went right is because of the efforts of the invaded nation's people.

    Way to go "Nation of Freedom".

    --
    The good, the evil and the vacuum tubes.
  93. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by fabs64 · · Score: 1

    Vietnam wasn't official? 0_o

    Not to diss your main point, which I assume is "when there is a plan and some investment and some followthrough it goes better" which is perfectly sensible

  94. Re:Somebody who knows the score tagged it "fascism by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

    Hitler was also a champion of...

    Godwin says you have lost the argument!

  95. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Vexorian · · Score: 1

    So, your solution is ? Have Russia invade Venezuela and then US nuke em?

    --

    Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
  96. nope by delete2kill · · Score: 0

    what freedom freedom to impose your views oh come on the small state is trying to assert itself like every other country its going through a phase give it 20 -30 yrs(see it happens in every democratic country or at least before a dictator/pseudo dictator think Musharraf, chavez or a head of nationalistic local/regional party ascends to power it takes time for them to master global process of doing work..some learn others dont) [single idol (chavez) cant turn country into socialist power it needs a enforcer think an all powerful party system(china ,USSR)or army(big financial player)(pakistan) what will happen is the point of interaction of two different system (capitalist and socialist) will create a nexus for corruption,might cause destablization,powerstruggleany number of things] it isint like it can compete with usa (usa has more or less quite a say in regional matters in both the american continents) you must realize it takes only a decade to turn foes into friends one they get the idea of capitalism (free market 'n all) as some one pointed out socialism is doling out manna from heaven be it oil or natural resources, it has only a limited shelf life what chavez is doing is garnering support i have not been into south american political system so no clue why he is doing that maybe trying to stabilize his support base ,appease a local functionary(or a faction)...

    1. Re:nope by Hatta · · Score: 1

      I realize english probably isn't your first language. But it's really hard to hold a conversation when you don't speak in complete sentences. Try writing out your thoughts, beginning each one with a capital letter and ending each one in a period instead of stringing them together with commas. All I see here is WHARRGARBL. But I suppose asking for proper grammar is "imposing my views" as well.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  97. Lost by Mr.+Lwanga · · Score: 1

    Hugo is Lost.

  98. I'm glad he did it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because video games are a fucking waste of time and human productivity.

    Better his people be employed sequestering CO2 or something. Just about anything is more worthwhile than the time and imagination sink that is video games. Gah!

    Yes, it almost makes me admire the fascist, tyrannical, homicidal, sociopathic basterd.

  99. Property = Government by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

    The underlying problem is that property, which is an essential concept in capitalism, requires government enforcement to exist. That means any capitalistic society needs a very strong government in order to work. This is why the US needs such a large, powerful government. Of course, individualism suffers as a result.

    The government has to write laws to define property and liability, and put in-place a police force, and a judiciary to settle all the disputes and take the appropriate people to jail. And in the end, the government is corruptible, so property and liability are defined unfairly. If this goes on long enough, you get a situation where most property was obtained unfairly, but it's all obtained legally. You have more than one in a hundred people in jail and a huge military force engaged in insuring that overseas assets are protected.

    In the end, any government will expand and become corrupted, destroying individualism and morality. Capitalism really is a form of government, and it is not exempt from this rule.

  100. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Omestes · · Score: 3, Funny

    You forgot Poland.

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  101. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Sasayaki · · Score: 1

    Again, as an Australian, clarify please.

    --
    Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
  102. Pro troll? by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    It really sounds like some professional troll AC wrote it.

    Anyway, as cold war is back, I don't believe anything until some Venezuela guy actually living there says "yes, games are banned". In fact, one shouldn't believe that too.

    The country had some kind of media coup, they (and we) have all right to be paranoid about these stories. I don't care if AFP reports it. They fooled the entire planet one time, yes the media. There are couple of excellent documentaries related to that coup attempt, it is like parallel universe they aired over TV until they totally lost hope and run away to the foreign countries who supported their attempt.

  103. death metal may be next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess this is just one of the few news any of you get from my country..... Just recently a new "Organic Law of Education" was passed. The government (!) will decide who enters university.... All in the attempt to crush the opposition at campuses.

  104. Actually, you have that backwards. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

    You sound like the rich kids on campuses who have no idea what they are talking about when they fall into line with the general greed and CIA driven attempts to destroy the possibility for a strong Venezuela. (That is, a Venezuela which isn't driven by fueled by slavery and illiteracy, ignorance and foreign-owned resources). --Propaganda works both ways, and if you think the side you are supporting isn't using enormous gobs of it, then you are living with your head in the ground.

    Try watching, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised", if you want a picture of the truth. --It's an amazing video; while an independent film company was shooting a documentary, a coup attempt took place and they filmed the whole thing in context. Only pathocrats could view such a thing and come away with your broken head-space.

    But I'm betting you won't even try looking at this, because it would show you a world view more accurate than the sick little dream you're living in, and which your ego will simply not allow you to assimilate because you are incapable of dealing with the fact that you are an idiot. (Ooooh! Scary!)

    Now go tell your lies to yourself about how you're smarter than the rest of us. --It's a lot easier than actually working to look at objective reality and deal with the scary things it reflects back to you about yourself.

    -FL

    1. Re:Actually, you have that backwards. by teamsleep · · Score: 1

      Well first of all I never said I was smarter than anyone. That was my opinion and it doesn't have to be correct.

      You can assume all you want that I'm some kind of idiot, it's just the information I learned. I feel he is a dictator and wants to be just like Fidel Castro. You have your own opinions just like I do.

      So your opinion is that the CIA is trying to destroy Venezuela? What's their motive? I also never said they're the only ones spewing propaganda, I know America has it's own propaganda.

      Any chance you can get me a link to that documentary? If not I'll go try to find it. I'd be happy to learn more and perhaps get the entire view. Now was this coup d'etat purported by the CIA?

    2. Re:Actually, you have that backwards. by Cumanes-alpha · · Score: 1

      And you for sure are the kind of people that can't see how biased are the news, AND DOCUMENTALS, you're the kind that likes all the Michael Moore documentaries because they're unbiased. That documentary you're talking about interviews some very VERY dumb rich people, and show one side of the story, however, there is another side. SO: I formally invite you to come to my Strong Venezuela to live face to face this Socialist Dream we're living free of the chains of the CIA, Slavery and Ignorance you're talking about. Stop seeing the objective reality and come here and LIVE it...our visas are far more easy to obtain than any other visas in the world.

    3. Re:Actually, you have that backwards. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

      I'd be happy to learn more and perhaps get the entire view.

      Wow. I pegged you wrong. I apologize.

      Anyway, it's the first item on a Google search. The full movie is available for viewing here.

      -FL

    4. Re:Actually, you have that backwards. by teamsleep · · Score: 1

      I'll watch it now. I can't seem to sleep so maybe this will be good to watch and learn.

      It's cool, I'm sure most of the times people don't understand me at first but then learn I'm a lot different.

      I've been learning much more about America's corruption problem. It's really rampant all over.

      Thanks for the movie.

  105. SO wrong. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

    Bullshit. There are so many layers of, "Totally WRONG" in what you are saying, it's hard to know where to begin.

    If you're just spouting out of ignorance, then do a little research. If you know what the truth is, but are simply a greedy asshole who wants to see another nation fall before the march of American Imperialism, (via the CIA), then please do the rest of the world a favor and jump under a truck.

    For everybody else, watch: "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised."

    It's on YouTube.

    -FL

    1. Re:SO wrong. by jzuccaro · · Score: 1
      If all your research involves watching that film you are seriously uninformed.
      You just watched a very nice piece of propaganda.
      If you are a really a truth seeker read about:
      • The new Education Law
      • The savage beating of journalists
      • The use of toxic and illegal tear gas by the police and national guard on protesters
      • Vote fraud: people with 7 or 8 different identities
      • The Tascon List: if you signed a petition against Chavez you became a second class citizen. Copies of the list where distributed to all state run companies, good luck working or having any kind of business relation with the state if you are on that list
      • The killing of the Altamira's Plaza protester

      No my friend, judging Chavez by that film is like judging Hitler by "triumph des wiles".
      I live here, I have suffered this last 10 years just because I decided to have an education and work hard, that makes my an Oligarch, along with all the middle class, go figure, Venezuela is the only country in the world with 4 million oligarchs
      I have breath tear gas and been shot at while marching. You watched a movie and you have all figured out. You have no idea, along with all your countrymen posting here, of the kind of monster you are breeding with your oil money.

  106. Re:Somebody who knows the score tagged it "fascism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    STFU, the discussion is ABOUT fascism, you idiot.

  107. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    South Korea.

  108. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

    Ever heard of Germany or Japan?

    Yeah, because the US did all of that, all alone. It's not like a certan dictatorship in the east sacrificed millions of its own to "flood" the German forces, for example.

    --
    Clever signature text goes here.
  109. Intresting choice of words by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sufficiently free society.

    Sufficient as far as I know means something like good enough. Not compleet. My income is sufficient to live on does not mean I am rich or I am without money worries. A diet that is suffcient to survive on would hardly be called optimal.

    So just how free should society be? Completly free?

    One of the problems in the world is that we wants simple things, left/right, while politics tend to be very complex. Take Cuba, you had a system before Castro that had the majority of the public living in oppression, and after Castro, the exact same thing. Of course, the people who had it good before are complaing that now it is so much worse. Well duh!

    That is what is fuels a lot of the violence in Iraq. You had a minority who controlled the country who suddenly had to give it all up and be ruled by the people they previously controlled. That sets bad blood. So the freedom of one means the restraint of another.

    South American countries can be divided into two groups, those that are friendly to the US and can kill as many people as they want, with US backing and those that are not friendly to the US and get slammed for building hospitals.

    Chavez is doing EXACTLY the same thing as the US has been trying to and a lot of european countries as well. So why does Chavez get so much more flak?

    Why the mentioning of weapon purchases? The US spends far more on killing tech and its senators are trying for the same laws. Where is the link? Oh, there isn't one.

    Chavez is running a country where the rich used to have their way completly. Now things changed and guess what, the rich don't like it and the US don't like it that a source of oil is no longer run by people who like them. It makes any reporting by any US citizen on Chavez in my opinion extremely suspect and this article is just a confimation of my susipicions.

    Yes this law is stupid, but the reporting on it is so biased that its simpler message is lost in the propoganda.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  110. Re:Somebody who knows the score tagged it "fascism by Rennt · · Score: 1

    Thats not a trick question, and can be easily answered:

    Socialism holds that the interests of the people outweigh the rights of the individual (or, by looking after the people first, the individual benefits).

    Fascism holds the interests of the State outweigh the rights of the individual (or, by looking after the State first, the individual benefits).

    And look! not hyperbolae!

  111. Re:Somebody who knows the score tagged it "fascism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a persistent idea (more commonly among Americans who maybe aren't good at geography) that if something calls itself "The Socialist so-and-so" and is fascist, then this means socialist = fascist.

    Anybody who knows their geography will have spotted all the "Democratic" countries that aren't and "Republics" that aren't and "People's" this or that which also aren't. Americans with a sense of irony might have noticed that their "United States" don't seem very united a lot of the time.

    But for some people the name is everything, if there's a country called the "The Democratic Republic" and it's an absolute monarchy, they will conclude that monarchy and democracy are the same thing. This makes them idiots.

  112. In other communist news... by Pedritox · · Score: 1

    Cuba is running out of toilet paper.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59EFcd7XOVA

    They're blaming it on the financial crisis... weird cause they blame everything on the embargo.

  113. Parent is one of Slashdot's most biased posts by INowRegretThesePosts · · Score: 3, Informative

    Venezuela's defense spending is just over $2B/year. Their oft-foe, Colombia, spends about $6B/year.

    Except that Colombia faces a bitter civil war. What next, will you compare with Israel?

    And the US spends over $400B/year.

    No, you will settle for the US, which has 43 times the GDP.

    And, FYI, your "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.

    Huh? Care to elaborate?

    Didn't bother to mention that New Orleans came in right after Caracas, with only one less murder per 100,000 people, did you?

    Maybe because such a comparison would be a textbook example of bias - comparing the "murder capital" of country A with the capital and largest city of country B? If you wanted a faint hope of impartiality, you would have compared Caracas with Washington, DC, or with a large and important US city such as New York.

    Or that Caracas's murder rate fell dramatically since their last survey.

    Sources? Comparison to previous years? (A comparison of two years is a really, really lousy way to establish a trend)

    1. Re:Parent is one of Slashdot's most biased posts by INowRegretThesePosts · · Score: 1

      After a quick Google search:

      http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1203/p06s01-woam.html:
      "Since president Chávez was elected in 1998, the homicide rate in the capital has more than doubled from 63 murders for every 100,000 inhabitants to 130 today. The country has experienced a parallel spike: from 20 to 48. That compares with a homicide rate in the US of 5.6, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)."

  114. Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also check the record of US investment in the Third Reich, and you can extend that research to investment in imperial Japan. Truth is we very much supported Germany and their militaristic outreach, as long as it extended extended eastward to the "sub-whites" and the russians. We had no problem with Hitler taking on the Russians. And no, the atom bomb did not help Japan (and neither was that the purpose.)

    Furthermore, there's a reason we only officially declare invasion when we think there will be a good outcome. Can you imagine if we declared invasion in all the instances of our underhanded tactics? Then the media wouldn't be able to ignore it.

  115. It doesn't matter by Espectr0 · · Score: 1

    Nobody buys games here anyway... You wouldn't either, if xbox 360 games are 250$ each. We instead go to our "local market" and get them for 15$

  116. Re:Individualism? Oh, no! Oh study! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh dear! What do they teach in schools these days? Oh, the same as in olden days? Hmm, perhaps that's why no-one posting here has the first notion of economics. If you do not study economics then you will not understand how a society could actually regulate its own affairs with freedom and justice hand in hand.

  117. From another Venezuelan... by Cumanes-alpha · · Score: 1

    Yes, well, you have a little taste of the cynicism that my country lives on everyday. Sometime ago I said "If they touch Internet in ANY WAY, I'll be immediately packing my stuff and moving to the "empire" as they refer to the USA, or Europe in second instance, but I DIDN'T SEE THIS CRAP COMING. So, I'm packing now (xbox360 included) ...by the way: I'm a Information Security Specialist, with 5 years of experience doing Incident Handling, Forensic Analysis and offering consulting services...Any employer interested? PLEASE!?!?

  118. Violent Games or Violent Streets? by applematt84 · · Score: 1

    No one is looking at the REAL big picture here. I may be just one example of violent video games not harming my childhood (but making it better by giving my friends and i something to do and bond over). However, if you make violent video games illegal, then kids will be selling these things on the corner and going to jail. You will then have children getting into constant trouble because there are no games that let them release stress. Now, all that said, why hasn't anyone included the real people that should be responsible for the children? PARENTS! My honest opinion is that there is a serious parenting problem if Mom & Dad are having trouble keeping little Johnny away from the TV and XBox or Computer. My parents had no problem limiting me to 2 hours of TV, Computer, or SNES ... PER DAY ... so i had to learn at a young age how to divide up my time and use it wisely. They had me record my time each day on a spreadsheet on the fridge. If it weren't for my parents, I'd probably be nuts, too!

    1. Re:Violent Games or Violent Streets? by Cumanes-alpha · · Score: 1

      There are so many things to do in this country that this legislation is just and plain ridiculous. Is like legislate about how the humans will have to penalize a predator for flying on a pterodactyl too low on a rainy day, while there are poverty, crime, corruption, inflation and scarcity of several basic products (all of which we actually have!). If they want to do something about it (and it won't work either), they could be enforcing compliance of the rating that comes with each videogame (+18, M, PG, i don't know and don't even care, because I'm a grown up)

    2. Re:Violent Games or Violent Streets? by applematt84 · · Score: 1

      i agree with you. why is the gov't sticking its' nose where it isn't needed? i don't really care if they enforce the ratings (like you said, i'm a grown up), but if they are going to go so far as to make violent games illegal, then they might as well outlaw Stephen King novels, etc. Because, you never know, some 30-year-old human being might read it and turn into a Paranoid-Schizophrenic and murder a bunch of people. They might as well outlaw horror/thriller books, as well. While they're at it, why not attack the movie industry? Damn politicians and their private agenda's.

  119. The wolrd are full of stupid people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn, these posts are actually a good pool of how many short minded stupid people are out there.

    Viva Chavez hasta el 2021 y mas alla.

  120. yes, americans are being ethnocentric by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    and venezuelans are being ethnocentric

    and iranians, and russians, and chinese, etc., ad nauseum

    it does no use pointing out ethnocentrism exists in the country of someone criticizing another, since ethnocentrism exists everywhere, forever

    the only truly useful criticism, despite what you wrote and what some idiot modded as insightful, is criticism devised from PRINCIPLES. if what i say, as an american, about something going on in japan, or venuela, or iran, or hell even the usa, if it is based simply on PRINCIPLES, it does not matter that i an american am saying it. because if it involves only principles, ANYONE from ANY country could say the SAME thing and there is NO ALTERATION IN MEANING

    based on logical and coherent PRINCIPLES, it is wrong for chavez to ban violent videogames, as violent videogames are never a source of violence in any society. what, historical rome was a picture of peace and love because they had no videogames? as more people are playing indoors on videogames, less are outside killing each other. violence has gone down over the last couple of decades videogame playing has gone up. violence is a function of simple human nature, no "the devil made me do it" bullshit blame game on media need apply

    and now, try to color or flavor those essentially principled, concept oriented words of mine as something america-related, or venezuela-related, or related to an y country, and you fail. as my words have to do with universal human concepts only. ethnicity and nationality are red herrings

    human beings are human beings, whether in caracas or chicago. only principles matter. talking about national differences is a losers game

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  121. This article is pure FUD by Kilobug · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This article is pure FUD and troll. The ChÃvez government bought Russian weapons ? Yeah. But why ? Oh, that's a question the anonymous coward will not ask. It may have to do with the fact USA put an embargo of selling repair pieces of military equipment to Venezuela, forcing ChÃvez to replace all the previous, USA-made equipment, with new Russian one, *just to maintain the level of its military*. Not to increase it.

    The ones increasing the military in South America, who even bomb beyhond their border, who threatens their neighbours to do it again, is not Venezuela. It's not ChÃvez. It's Colombia, and the fascist, USA-allied, Uribe.

    As for defending traditional games, and especially games that require more than one player (as opposed to most video games, of course, not all of them), it's a very wise move. Too much TV and video games *are* doing bad to people. I'm very glad my parents limited my TV and video game time as a child, making me read books, solve puzzle, play with legos, or a board game with my siblings. Any wise government would advise the same. As for yoyo, it teaches patience and dexterity.

    So, what's wrong with ChÃvez ? What's the reason for this bashing ? That, being president of a violent country (that was the case when he arrived in power, Caracas was already a very dangerous city), he tries to attack the problem by several edges at the same time ? The police reform, the new reeducation through arts (music, theater, ...) policy, the Mision Vuelven Caras to train those people into useful jobs, and also, a very important point against violence : education.

    And preventing children from being exposed to the most violent games and movies is part of the non-violent education.

    I don't like bans. I'm not sure it'll do any good. But with the dreadful situation ChÃvez inherited from the previous, corrupt, neoliberal presidents, I fear he doesn't have any choice. The most important question, to which the anonymous coward has no beginning of answer, is "what is the limit of the ban ?"

    1. Re:This article is pure FUD by Cumanes-alpha · · Score: 0, Troll

      IMHO, you're trying to look at the good stuff of this government just overseeing the objectives of the plans they have implemented, not the real outcome of those. This "gentleman" Chavez, has 10 years in the power..10 YEARS, and still the responsible of all the bad stuff Venezuela has is "the 40 previous years"...COME ON!, 10 years isn't enough for something? Dude, I live in Venezuela, I've been robbed 3 times and I consider myself lucky to not be harmed in any of those assaults. All my friends has been robbed at least once, and when I say robbed I mean, with a gun, and not in dangerous places...anywhere, even malls. It's easy to be seduced by the promise of a better world based on the principles that Chavez have popularized, but i think you're just as a lot of people here: seduced by his words, and by the cynic vision of the government. And by that many people here trust more in what they heard from them than in what they faces everyday. You mentioned that your parents teaches you several things besides TV and Video Games, and thats how it's meant to be..YOUR PARENTS, not your BIG BROTHER CHAVEZ. Of course, if you care enough the issue and watch news from Venezuela, i advice you to try to watch both sides of the coin...regrettably each side (opposition and government) have influenced the media so much that you don't know which one is telling the truth, but is fair to hear both sides without prejudice, if after that, you're still thinking Chavez is the man, i dare you to come and live this utopia of country for the rest of your life, where the government, and not you, decides what your children learn in schools, overthrown elected authorities just because they aren't of his party, throw chemical weapons at rallies, and supress your rights to argue. I'm not a rich guy, I'm not a poor guy either, I'm just your average neighborhood guy who enjoy freedom and to be alive for as long as possible. I just hope that you and your family, in whatever country you live, don't have to live in a cage, as us.

  122. Just ban one game by braindrainbahrain · · Score: 1

    Maybe they just want to ban this game.

  123. Developing social skills? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Developing friends and social skills, especially when you prefer increasing your individualism by playing quite violent games in your parents basement? OH NO!

  124. You are so funny ... by sg_aurelius · · Score: 1

    I haven't read all the comments, however I'd say that you Americans(I suppose most of you are americans) are so funny, especially when you are talkiing about liberty, democracy, human rights etc etc. Of course I could argue on that explicitly, but there are just so many things. I will only say that. US has caused so much damage to South America, the exploitation of natural and human resources is/was that intense, brutal and invasive, that people like Hugo Chavez are sth like an oasis for the area. Of course, he is bad for american interests and this is reflected obviously to the american media. For Americans, or us Europeans, 100 people dead in Iraq, or Venezuela, or ... don't worth 1 death of our people. But this doesn't work the other way around. Of course you can keep on talking and talking, but in the end you won't be able to reach any solid conclusion, because you are(most of us are) so brainwashed. Indeed, the article is so strongly biased, supporting all of what I just said. It is ridiculous to really comment it out.

  125. Promote Egoism? by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

    Hey, that's MY yo-yo! Hands off!

    --
    I am not devoid of humor.
  126. Awww, listen to the rich boy suffer. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

    I live here, I have suffered this last 10 years just because I decided to have an education and work hard, that makes my an Oligarch, along with all the middle class, go figure, Venezuela is the only country in the world with 4 million oligarchs [. . .] You have no idea, along with all your countrymen posting here, of the kind of monster you are breeding with your oil money.

    So let me take a stab at understanding your thinking here. . , oil wealth is BAD because in this case it is not being raped from your country by my country. This means that your government is able to use that money to pour into Venezuela as it sees fit as opposed to how an American corporation would see fit. (And the American corporation would, of course, pour a smaller but more concentrated stream of that wealth into the pockets of the rich parents of your school chums, who in turn would be happy to maintain a national state of serfdom.) Yes, I begin to see the logic behind your comments.

    I also feel compelled to point out that in a country of around 26.4 million, your (presumptuous) figure of 4 million people is hardly what a sane person could term a 'middle class'. When one sixth of the population is rich and the rest are essentially serfs, you are looking at what is better understood as, "a well-and-truly fucked up system". When Chavez is working to balance the wealth, it is to be expected that the privileged sons and daughters of the rich claim that they arrived at their positions by "Hard Work" rather than from "benefiting from slavery", and that any change to the system which would prevent their continued exploitation of other humans is naturally going to be contested with asinine examples of the sort you offer. There's nothing wrong with wealth, but preventing others from sharing in it through suppression and subversion is evil.

    As propaganda hits hardest at home, and as you sound like the Venezuelan version of a dumb & selfish republican, I suspect you are a poor representative of the truth.

    There are plenty of people in the U.S. who think that they know what's going on, and who screech the same kind of bullshit about home-grown politics. And like you, most of them appear to be suffering from a form mental retardation where reality and emotional day-dreams get all mixed up together.

    And yes, I am basing my opinions on more than the contents of just one film, thank-you very much.

    -FL

  127. You've got to be kidding. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a joke, right? Because I am damn-near laughing so hard that my sides are starting to hurt. >. Talk about the epitome of hypocrisy.

  128. Wish there was a way to take back mod points! by csartanis · · Score: 1

    Undoing my accidental mod.

  129. Chavez : The devil handing out holy water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is very funny, it sounds like the devil is handing out holy water.
    Chavez with his big mouth and stupid supreme attitude over his citizens contradicts his worries about children being exposed to violence.

    Lic.Gregory Kearney Lawson
    attorneykearney@yahoo.com