Re: (OPE-L) Re: Paresh Chattopadhyay 'Capital, The Progenitor of Socialism'

From: Paul Bullock (paulbullock@EBMS-LTD.CO.UK)
Date: Tue Dec 30 2003 - 17:02:42 EST

 I think the equation of Chavez with Menem and Fujimori quite disgraceful.
The later two were/are unconditional agents of imperialism, Chavez is
regarded as due for regime change by the US! Quite the opposite association.
Why this despair and cynicism about Chavez??

Paul Bullock.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rakesh Bhandari" <rakeshb@STANFORD.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: (OPE-L) Re: Paresh Chattopadhyay 'Capital, The Progenitor of

> >--On Monday, December 29, 2003 7:41 AM -0800 Rakesh Bhandari
> ><rakeshb@STANFORD.EDU> wrote:
> >
> >...
> >>We do know that he fired 18,000 workers (!)in name of
> >>their all being stooges of the imperialists.
> >
> >What's your source that these were 100% 'workers', not middle managers
> >exec.'s?
> >
> >Paul
> >
> Paul,
> I'm sure that not all the people fired by Lt. Col. Hugo Chavez were
> labourers. I think Michael L. suggested that most however were
> technicians. Despite the good fortune of strong oil prices for this
> rentier state, even the official unemployment rate had increased
> under the Lt.Col's rule--electorally maintained, to be sure, but then
> so was the rule of Fujimori and Menem.
> Rakesh

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 02 2004 - 00:00:01 EST