Other News
5 Reasons Why Comparing Trump to Hugo Chavez Is Nonsense PDF Imprimir Correo

                                         


This U.S. elections cycle, Billionaire turned reality TV star turned far right-wing politician Donald Trump, has been compared to various—and often nefarious—historical figures.

Donald Trump has been compared to revolutionary Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez.

Few of these comparisons could be more inaccurate and foolish as the various articles, and now Clinton campaign video, comparing the sexist, race-baiting Trump to late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.It’s true that both men speak loudly, at times with colloquial or even colorful language, but their views, backgrounds and actions could not be further apart.

Below are just five of the many reasons why any attempt to compare Trump with Chavez should laughed out of whatever space it’s presented in.


1. Trump’s Silver Spoon vs. Chavez’s Humble Origins

Throughout the election campaign, anyone who for some reason was unaware as to the source of Donald Trump’s wealth, has learned that he began his real estate empire with a "small loan" of US$1 million from his father, and later inherited an additional US$39 million.

Chavez on the other hand, grew up in a poor family of mixed African and Indigenous heritage on Venezuela’s plains. He entered the military, where he became involved politically and rose through its ranks to later lead a political movement called the Fifth Republic. Chavez was elected president of Venezuela on four occasions, each by large margins.

The background of Trump and Chavez respectively, weighed heavy on their political outlook, with Chavez championing the plight of the poor and marginalized while the Donald continues to trumpet the private sector as the cure for all ills.


2. Donald Thinks Markets Work for the Poor vs. Chavez Using the State to Empower the People

Perhaps Donald Trump should be given some credit for raising the plight the U.S. working class—decline in jobs, wages, crumbling communities and schools, lack of opportunities. But while he often attempts to convince the electorate that he is a great guy who loves “Blacks,” “Hispanics,” or whomever he is trying awkwardly to woo, he is definitely more in love with free market economics.

Sure, he may slam the results of NAFTA and warn about the dangers of the TPP, but really, he is simply stating that he would negotiate the terms of such deals to be more favorable to the United States and its struggling proletariat.

Moreover, Trump has persistently argued for less state involvement in basically anything that isn’t the police, military or border patrol, a la Robert Nozick. Make no mistake about it—the capitalist is arguing for market solutions to the problems generated by capitalism.

Many of Chavez’s predecessors, following the trend in the region and the "advice" from Washington, also sought to create more space and less regulations in the private sector with the promise of jobs and opportunity. Not surprisingly, these policies generated more poverty.

Chavez inherited a Venezuela in decline, with rampant inequality and the issues that come with. The response from his government was to empower the poor, through the creation of a wide array of social programs to support people’s needs as well as mechanisms to give them greater say in what was done in their communities and country. Chavez used the state to direct resources to the people, through these programs as well and the local councils.As a result, poverty levels plummeted, access to education and health skyrocketed and Venezuelans remain among the most politically active population in the region.The country is currently experiencing economic difficulties, predominantly due to their decades-long dependency on oil as the only engine of the economy, but this does not erase the tremendous social gains made by rejecting a neoliberal approach to meeting people’s needs.


3. Chavez's Politics of Inclusion vs. Trump's Racism, Sexism and Scapegoating

Chavez initially ran on a moderate platform of increasing distribution of Venezuela’s considerable oil wealth to the country’s poor, estimated at some 55 percent of the Venezuelan population at the time of his election. Throughout his tenure, the Bolivarian Revolution indeed promoted class consciousness, but within a national inclusionary project.

Chavez pushed for women’s right, African and Indigenous rights and heritage, and even LGBT rights in a country that generally swings conservative on these questions. Chavez’s socialist outlook began to be heavily influenced by an environmentalist lens, in spite of Venezuela’s dependence on oil.

The plethora of denigrating statements by Trump regarding women, Muslims, Latin Americans, Black activists etc etc should be sufficient to illustrate the monumental gap between climate change denying Trump’s worldview and that of el comandante. But just as concerning are the friends and supporters he is attracting, including endorsements from neo-nazi organizations, anti-immigrant militants like Joe Arpaio and islamophobic groups.


4. Chavez's Venezuela Accepted Refugees vs. Trump's Demonization of Migrants

A seldom known fact is that Venezuela has taken in the highest number of refugees in the region. The majority of these are from neighboring Colombia, where the country’s 50-year civil war has pushed out millions of Colombians.

A staggering 5 million Colombians live in Venezuela, including some 176,000 with official refugee status. Under Chavez, the government began means of nationalizing Colombians, and even those who are not citizens were eligible for social programs begun under the Bolivarian revolution.More recently, the country offered to take in 20,000 Syrian refugees.Trump’s policies and supporters see migrants and refugees as an imminent threat and have pushed for radical measures including the wholesale deportation of some 11 million people without status, the building of a wall with Mexico, surveillance and branding of Muslim communities etc.


5. Trump Totes War vs. Chavez’s Role for Peace

Some consider Trump to be "less" of a hawk than Hillary Clinton, given her track record at the State Department where she oversaw the destruction of Libya, the onset of the conflict in Syria, and the legitimization of the coup that turned Honduras into the murder capital of the world.

While Trump has a softer take of Russia than Clinton, he is by no means a dove. He has consistently reaffirmed his intention to massively increase U.S. military spending and has argued that the U.S. should sell its imperialistic, military services, rather than reduce or god forbid end them. His appeals to use U.S. military might as a negotiation card when dealing with countries that could resist his plans—say, with Mexico not wanting to pay for his wall—should be telling.

Chavez on the other hand, may have been a military man, but he actively promoted peace in the region and abroad. His role in initiating the historic peace negotiations between Colombia and the country’s guerrilla movements has been widely acknowledged by both parties, and the late leader often intervened personally to pressure for the release of people taken into custody by the FARC.

Venezuela’s president was also a lonely voice opposing the onset of the so-called war on terror and its first mission in Afghanistan, as well as the follow-up invasion and occupation of Iraq. In addition, Chavez forged strong ties with Palestinians, going as far as to break diplomatic relations with Israel following the 2009 conflict which left 1,200 Palestinians dead and over 5,000 wounded

Courtesy TeleSur

 
Venezuelan Chocolate ICOA wins for the fifth time best award for White chocolate of the world PDF Imprimir Correo

19 octubre, 2016


After beating chocolates from over 100 finalists from all the continents, Chocolate White Carenero Superior (ICOA) won the Gold Medal at the International Chocolate Awards 2016, being crowned for the fifth consecutive year as the best in the world.

This type of chocolate belongs to the Venezuelan company Chocolates El Rey, which also came first in other categories, specifically: "Producer of Chocolate", "Producer Country of Origin" and "direct trade".

The awards were granted by a panel of experts from various nations, including chefs and internationally renowned confectioners.

Once again, Venezuelan chocolate continues to lead. Congratulations to this brand for its great achievement and to maintain the national Chocolate as one of the best in the world.


http://www.arepadigital.com/nacionales/el-chocolate-venezolano-icoa-gana-por-quinta-vez-el-premio-al-mejor-chocolate-blanco-del-mundo/

 
President Maduro congratulates Antonio Guterres on his election as Secretary General of the UN PDF Imprimir Correo



BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL RELATIONS

PRESS RELEASE


The President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, had a phone conversation with the new Secretary General of the United Nations, former Prime Minister of the Portuguese Republic, Antonio Guterres. The Venezuelan President extended, on behalf of the People and the Venezuelan government, its warmest and fraternal congratulations to the latter on his election as Secretary General for the period 2017-2021.

The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela avails itself of this opportunity to renew, its full commitment and support to the three pillars of the Organization: Peace, Security, Human Rights and Development, as a founding member of this multilateral forum and fierce promoter of strengthening multilateralism and building a multipolar and multicultural word, based on solidarity, social justice, complementarity and integration of peoples.

The Venezuelan government is convinced that the Lord Guterres, who conveys his best wishes, possess professional credentials, diplomatic skills, and understanding of international politics, to address the pressing challenges currently facing the multilateral system, which suffers the ravages of unilateralism, violence, terrorism, imperial expansion and increase in animosity among world powers.

The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, avails itself of this opportunity to Mr. Guterres of its willingness to support your management, not only in Venezuela, but also from its seat as the presidency of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), in favor of the interests of South people and building a world where peace prevails and development; a more just and equal world; a world where the fraternal friendship and solidarity is a reality to consolidate a multipolar, multiculture world in harmony with the Universe.

Caracas, October 13, 2016

 
India’s Clarion Call at the Margarita NAM Summit! PDF Imprimir Correo

Mainstream, VOL LIV No 42 New Delhi October 8, 2016

India’s Clarion Call at the Margarita NAM Summit!

Sunday 9 October 2016

by Sudhanshu Tripathi


The Non-Aligned Movement, while holding fast the true spirit of the doctrine of non-alignment, must act as the vanguard of all principal international debates on political, strategic and socio-economic issues and must also suitably modernise itself to remain relevant in the world.


Introduction


The 17th Summit of the Non-Aligned countries of the Third World, spreading over the continents of Asia, Africa and Latin America, was held at the Margarita island in Venezuela during September 13-18, 2016 with all enthusiasm and fervour, though India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, could not attend the summit and instead its Vice-President, Hamid Ansari, represented the country, leading the Indian delegation. As the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), which began its journey in 1961, during highly tense days of the ongoing fierce Cold War between the two antagonistic blocs led by the USA and the then USSR, as a global movement of just 25 countries, now consists of 120 countries and that proves its continuing popularity and relevance since the origin of the movement after the Second World War.


Obviously the NAM, which is based upon the doctrine of Non-Alignment, known as the brain-child of India’s first Prime Minister, late Jawaharlal Nehru, today has enough grounds to stay as well as sustain due to the continued adherence and upholding of its core ideals, namely, “freedom of action” and “independence of judgment” and also “sovereign equality of nation-states”, established by the Peace Treaty of Westphalia of 1648. All these were very popular then among the newly independent countries of the Third World because they had long suffered the agony and trauma of centuries of inhuman and wicked course of colonialism and, therefore, they had the sole desire to protect and preserve their new hard won freedom and also to rebuild themselves as independent nations in the international community.


An Alternative Model of International Behaviour


It was this desire that the late Jawaharlal Nehru sincerely grasped immediately after the Second World War and some other prominent leaders of the Third World, like Marshal Joseph Broz Tito of Yugoslavia, President Garnal Abdel Nasser of Egypt and President Sukarno of Indonesia who proposed an alternative and independent course of action for the newly independent Third World countries in the world divided into two hostile ideological camps of capitalism and communism and each vying for increasing its membership by inviting newly independent countries into their respective folds in a bid to consolidate their strength for establishing their supremacy in the world. Thus this dominant desire of the Third World countries later crystallised into the doctrine of “Non-Alignment” and that was first elaborated by Pandit Nehru on September, 7, 1946 in his radio speech to the nation, even prior to the independence of India. In fact, this desire to remain independent of group rivalry and bloc-politics was a very timely remedy to save the world from another impending World War, which was to be a nuclear holocaust in all likelihood, marred by bitter Cold War tensions and several ongoing regional wars.


In this horrible scenario, the NAM under India’s founding leadership, while deriving its strength and sustenance from the country’s ancient cultural ethos and deeply religious traditions advocating eternal moral values, made a clarion call for three Ds, namely, Decolonisation, Disarmament and Develop-ment—all for the noble cause of establishing permanent peace in the world which had already been torn by two humanitarian disasters in the form of unfortunate World Wars.


Present Turmoil


Once again, the world is passing through, perhaps, the worst ever phase of terrorism and religious fundamentalism as well various kinds of heinous and macabre crimes of untold and unimaginable magnitude, besides other challenges like economic recession, environ-mental degradation and sustainable development, feudal-monarchic social set-up both at the national and international levels demanding democratisation of international relations and reforming the United Nations, violation of human rights, gender bias, child abuse and sexual crimes and many more, which cannot be honestly tackled simply by formulating laws or concluding international treaties.


These challenges can only be sincerely addressed if a collective global human endeav-our, based upon a value-based and philosophical vision, is initiated under the aegis of the United Nations, representing the global wishes and aspirations. And that vision is truly provided by the doctrine of non-alignment which, indeed, stands for equality, justice, fraternity on equal footing, and global peace, thereby paving

the way for creating a new world order characterised by these eternal and moral values.


India Exhorts


This is why, India’s Vice-President, Hamid Ansari, exhorted the movement by his inspiring words: “Our theme for the next three years—Peace, Sovereignty and Solidarity for Development—is in congruence with our founding principles.” He made India’s founding position of the NAM clear by emphasising upon peace and sover-eignty being the essential prerequisites for development and cooperation along with ensuring the dignity and development of all humankind.


He also recalled the spirit inherent in the unforgettable words of the late Indian PM, Smt India Gandhi, about the NAM “as the largest peace movement of the world” that she had said during the course of the Seventh NAM Summit at New Delhi in 1983. He further stressed in the summit that the NAM must stand as the vanguard of all substantial international debates on political, social, economic and strategic issues and must also suitably adapt itself to the matching times so as to remain relevant and convincingly responsible towards its members in particular, and the entire humanity upon the mother earth in general.


Final Communiqué


The final communiqué of the Summit made a vigorous call for meaningful UN reforms, perhaps in an apparent reference to the United for Peace Resolutions adopted during the Korean War of the 1950s, when the UN Security Council was torn by the Cold War politics and no substantive decisions could be arrived at due to the mutually antagonistic views of the USA and the then USSR thereby crippling the global body, that may return the glory of the UN General Assembly of yesteryears so that it may function effectively despite hurdles created by the UN Security Council. Similarly it addressed all other prominent issues already pending under the forum of the movement, namely, South-South cooperation, New World Infor-mation and Communication Order, protection of environment and maintaining climate balance, inclusive growth and pending economic reforms for a New World Economic Order, Sustainable Development, Restraining Human Rights Violations, Child Abuse and Gender Bias, Total Conventional and Nuclear Disarmament, and last but not the least, elimination of terrorism of all shades and forms etc.—all with a view to establish a just and rule-based international democratic order ensuring equality, freedom, progress and prosperity for all countries in the world.


Thus the NAM, though often called irrelevant and redundant by the crooked American campaign, because it has no reason to exist after the end of the Cold War, has once again proved its vigour and vitality and also its reasons to exist because there is no end to challenges in the world, which come one after the other, and that will always demand a collective global voice and action. And for that the NAM is always useful and meaningful. What else can be the reason of its existence which is further supported by its consistently rising membership. As a British commentator had said a few decades back, “NAM has come to stay and it will stay as long as Super Power elephants threaten to trample the grass where lesser animals also graze.” It still holds true and will hold so forever.


Conclusion


Though the challenges are grave and threats unimaginable, but there is enough scope for sincere efforts with honest intentions and that one is not alone today as there is no dearth of saner minds and conscientious and God-fearing people. Let us all unite to defeat all evil forces in the world, particularly terrorism in all its forms, besides accomplishing all other goals—was India’s clarion call at the Margarita NAM Summit. This is possible because nothing is beyond human endeavour.


Dr Sudhanshu Tripathi is an Associate Professor of Political Science, M.D.P.G. College, Pratapgarh (UP). He can be contacted at e-mail: sudhanshu. Esta dirección de correo electrónico está protegida contra robots de spam. Necesita activar JavaScript para poder verla

Courtesy: 

http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article6735.html


 
Why NAM is Needed PDF Imprimir Correo





The 17th Non-Aligned Movement(NAM) summit in Venezuela’s Margarita Island proved to be a lacklustre affair which it had never witnessed in its so impactful history. About 12 heads of states attended from the 120-member group, which was quite less than the participation at the Iran summit, a signal that the movement is on the decline.

The Indian PM was requested by Venezuela to participate as India was a founder-member of the movement but India rejected the request and the Vice-President attended the meet. The Indian stand is clear—that the days of alliance system and power blocs are over, hence NAM carries not much importance. This viewpoint of the Indian Government can be contested. In fact the Indian Vice-President raised the issue of terrorism at the meet; if the issue would have been raised by the Indian PM then it would have had sharper meaning before the world audience but the opportunity was deliberately missed. The relevance of NAM is self-proven: when issues like terrorism are raised as major global problems, then the NAM platform automatically becomes highly relevant. When NAM deals with newly emerging problems from global warming, debt-affected low income countries to UN reforms, then it establishes itself as a deliberative and coordinating platform for the developing countries, even in the changed global milieu.

The world is more violent and big power rivalries from MENA to the South China Sea have increased in recent times. NAM provides an alternative medium to tackle these issues in fresh and innovative ways but this aspect was lost by several leaders. India too appeared to have shunned the Movement. US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and in recent times Condoleezza Rice always criticised NAM; now India has accepted their arguments and shifted towards the US and that is perceptible. In such a scenario the commitment to NAM was to be diluted and the dilution was made with no considerations for the countries from the South and the needs of the poor nations for whom the support of India was a policy-commitment. However, India deliberately overlooked these points.

The meet was important in the sense that the politically troubled Nicolas Maduro, the Socialist President of Venezuela, with support from Cuban President Castro said that the US onslaught was being experienced in the region. The onslaught was on different aspects of their existence which spanned from politics, economy, and culture to the life of their countries. The recognition of such an onslaught on the region is the need of the hour as global politics is not only the game of power but it has several intertwined dimensions including impacts on the culture, economy and independence of the foreign policy; these dimensions relate to the core pillars of the NAM. When the Venezuelan President feels that the US corporates with the local elements are trying to oust him, then the utility of NAM becomes all the more significant because the US involvement in local politics is a signal of interventionist power politics for the developing countries. Countries like the Philippines have now realised the adverse impact of the US influence in their lives.

The declaration of the 17th summit has highlighted certain relevant issues which cannot be ignored. The problem with analysts and policy-makers is that NAM is treated by them as an organisation of the Cold War age but its next generation evolution has taken place in the age of post-USSR dissolution; the new problems have been adequately addressed by it. Several members may not have placed adherence to the NAM philosophy and activism in their foreign policy as a top priority but it does not mean that the NAM meet was useless or it has no prospect for the future.

New problems are emerging and the new alliance systems are evolving. NAM recognised these and its declaration has several elements which developing nations need to take note of. These included—to decisively address the challenges posed in the areas of peace, economic and social development, human rights and international cooperation, to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with Article 2 and Chapter VI of the Charter of the United Nations, as well as with the UN Resolution 26/25 of October 24, 1970 and international law, to emphasise the sovereign equality of states, the non-intervention in the internal affairs of states, the peaceful settlement of disputes, and the abstention from the threat or use of force, adoption of a future Compre-hensive Convention for Combating International Terrorism, Israel’s withdrawal from territories occupied since June 1967, in accordance with Resolutions 242, and 338, to recover and strengthen the authority of the General Assembly as the most democratic, accountable, universal and representative body of the Organisation and the reform of the Security Council, in order to transform it into a more democratic, effective, efficient, transparent and representative body, and in line with contem-porary geo-political realities, to fulfil the Agenda’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals and its 169 targets for all nations and peoples, to strengthen the multilateral trading system so as to provide an enabling environment for development, by ensuring a level playing field for developing countries in international trade, and to allocate importance of increasing Aid for Trade and capacity building, in order to strengthen the participation of developing countries in the Global Value Chain and promote regional economic integration and interconnectivity, the transfer of technology from developed countries, on favourable terms, in climate change area the developed countries need to fulfill their commitments of providing finance, transfer of appropriate technology and capacity building to developing countries, the reform of the international financial architecture with democratisation of the decision-making institutions of Bretton Woods (IMF and World Bank), to emphasise the South-South Cooperation as an important element of international cooperation for the sustainable development of their peoples, as a complement and not as a substitute to the North-South Cooperation, which allows for the transfer of appropriate technologies, in favorable conditions and preferential terms, to highlight the efforts of the international community to counter and eradicate the spread of various pandemics, among them the Ebola, as well as for confronting the aftermath of natural disasters around the world, to focus global refugee problems and the problems of migrants which mainly affects the women and children and to emphasize the need for information and communication strategies to be deeply rooted in historical and cultural processes and to call on the media of the developed countries to respect the developing countries in the formulation of their opinions, models and perspectives with a view to enhancing the dialogue among civilisations.

These components of the declaration are important for global politics as these issues and problems may accentuate in the near future; hence need is to keep NAM alive and sustainable. India has a specific role in this process.

The next meet will be organised in Baku, the Republic of Azerbaijan, in 2019 as it has been elected as the next President of the movement. Till then NAM as a supporting platform for the global betterment needs to be rediscovered by all its members, mainly its founding members.

Dr Vivek Kumar Srivastava is the Vice-Chairman, CSSP and Consultant, CRIEPS, Kanpur.\




 
<< Inicio < Anterior 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Siguiente > Fin >>

Página 2 de 16

Gallery

img_1475827618_825_lg.jpg img_1475827618_931_sm.jpg img_1475827618_575.jpg img_1475827494_51_lg.jpg img_1475827494_728_sm.jpg img_1475827494_731.jpg img_1475827477_47_lg.jpg img_1475827477_53_sm.jpg img_1475827477_401.jpg img_1475827374_945_lg.jpg