Chavez May Jail Workers for Striking

David Floyd · February 9, 2003, 21:13

Chavez Vows to Jail Striking Workers
2 hours, 13 minutes ago

By STEPHEN IXER, Associated Press Writer

CARACAS, Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez threatened Sunday to jail the thousands of oil workers fired for leading a two-month strike against him.

"Fired is nothing! Many of them should go to prison for sabotaging the Venezuelan economy," Chavez said of the more than 9,000 workers dismissed from the state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela S.A.

Chavez's threats came one day after more than 100,000 Chavez opponents protested in Caracas in support of the fired oil workers. Thousands more held a similar protest Sunday in the state of Carabobo, 66 miles west of the capital. A bicycle protest also was organized in Caracas.

The nationwide strike was called Dec. 2 to demand Chavez's resignation or early elections. But its leaders — business groups, labor unions and leftist and conservative politicians — agreed to end the protest last week in all areas but the crucial oil industry.

Chavez on Sunday called the strike an "oil coup" aimed at unseating him by paralyzing the oil industry, which provides half of government income. He also has accused his opponents of waging an "economic coup" which he blames for Venezuela's deteriorating economy.

Chavez quoted Venezuela's penal code when threatening the oil workers. He said saboteurs had intentionally damaged ports and oil installations and, if convicted, could face up to five years in prison.

The strike cost Venezuela over $4 billion, the government estimates.

Chavez claims most of PDVSA's 40,000 employees have returned to work. Strike leaders deny this, saying thousands refuse to return until the president rehires the 9,000 fired and agrees to an early vote on his rule. Another 900 oil workers were fired over the weekend, the newspaper El Universal said Sunday.

Still, the oil industry — the world's fifth-largest supplier before the strike — is slowly recovering. Chavez, who spoke at the El Palito refinery in western Venezuela, said production is at 1.9 million barrels a day. This compares to over 3 million barrels a day before the strike and just 200,000 at the height of the strike.

Dissident executives say production is nearer 1.3 million barrels a day, and gasoline shortages continue. Motorists wait hours outside the few stocked service stations, while many citizens have taken up cycling to save on fuel.

Several thousand Chavez foes rode bicycles around Caracas on Sunday in support of the fired oil workers. Many wore red, yellow and blue clothes — the colors of Venezuela's flag.

The president also threatened to use newly imposed currency controls against his opponents. Controls were imposed last week to shore up the weak bolivar and to slow capital flight. The bolivar was fixed at 1,600 per U.S. dollar and a currency administration office was set up to distribute dollars.

Critics say the controls are Chavez's latest attempt to restrict freedom in Venezuela. They fear dollars will only be available to government sympathizers and not to the opposition.

Chavez, a former paratrooper who led a failed military coup in 1992, was elected to power in 1998 and re-elected in 2000. He promised to wipe out the corruption of previous governments and redistribute the country's vast oil wealth to the poor majority.

But after four years in power, unemployment is approaching 20 percent and inflation has soared over 30 percent.

Peace talks organized by the Organization of American States have failed to end the bitter standoff between the government and opposition.

*************

And you think labor relations in the US suck - try moving to Venezuela

All in all,

to Mr. Chavez. Workers should be free to strike at will and corporations should be free to fire them at will. But the government should not jail people for striking

Shi Huangdi · February 9, 2003, 21:31

Disgusting actions by Chavez

However, because he is an anti-US leftist, I am guessing the left will be hypocritical and write Chavez a pass for striking.

Ramo · February 9, 2003, 22:09

Yeah, Chavez is a bastard.

Quote:

However, because he is an anti-US leftist, I am guessing the left will be hypocritical and write Chavez a pass for striking.

Yes, it's not like Venezuelan leftists oppose Chavez.

Imran Siddiqui · February 9, 2003, 22:40

Btw, why was this fool elected in the first place?

This is the prime example why 'protest votes' are due to lead to bad things.

Oerdin · February 9, 2003, 23:30

Chavez is on the far left of the political spectrum. He campaigned on a platform of crushing taxes on industry/the upper class and massive welfare for the poor so most leftists love him. That he's been a virtual dictator who's illegally rewritten the country's constitution, packed the courts with his yes men, imprisioned political desenters, and ruined Venezeula's economy doesn't seem to matter to most leftists.

monolith94 · February 10, 2003, 00:07

"This is the prime example why 'protest votes' are due to lead to bad things."
Yeah! Another good example is when protest votes for Nader made it so that Gore lost!

Aro · February 10, 2003, 01:05

I'm a leftist (wait! don't shoot me! I'm a moderate one!) and I think Chavez is a very stupid moron. Unfortunately, a elected stupid moron. He will cause a lot of damage to the Venezuelan economy, for sure... but not alone. To destroy the Venezuelan economy (and maybe the country, too) you need morons in both sides... And they are there.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Btw, why was this fool elected in the first place?

Economies with such big gap between riches and poors are dangerously unstable. Electors without jobs, money or food have this peculiar tendency, to think with their stomachs instead of their brains. You can see Chavez as a (bad) result of this.
However, when something like that happens in a distant country, or a country without any goods or resources... Who cares?

Just for the records:
1- The official position of the Brazilian Government (leftist

) is:
Chavez was legally elected. If you want to fire him, do it legally.
2- Leftists (as myself) strongly support the right to strike.
3- I'm not a communist, guys... And some of my best friends are right-wing...

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

This is the prime example why 'protest votes' are due to lead to bad things.

You're right, "protest votes" can result in bad things...

Quote:

Originally posted by monolith94

Yeah! Another good example is when protest votes for Nader made it so that Gore lost!

And the same can happens with "we love our leader" votes. Saddham Hussein was elected with 100% of votes in Iraq...

Well, about Iraq... That was a 100% "love our leader or die" vote...

Oil involved in the three cases (Iraq, Venezuela and GWB)... Nah, just a coincidence. I know, I know... oil has nothing to do with the Iraq war, the strikes at Venezuela or the election of Bush.

chequita guevara · February 10, 2003, 01:13

Quote:

Originally posted by monolith94
"This is the prime example why 'protest votes' are due to lead to bad things."
Yeah! Another good example is when protest votes for Nader made it so that Gore lost!

Not that Republican's illegally removing 91,000 people off the rolls in Florida and stuffing the ballots with absentee ballots had anything to do with it. Not that Gore's complete ineptitude at running a campaign had anything to do with it. Not that Gore's people's willingness to screw the rest of Florida's voters by only demanding recounts in four counties (he would have won if he'd gone for a recount of the whole state) had anything to do with it. Yeah, let's blame the only major candidate with any integrety.

As for Chavez, I agree, this is a dastardly move. On the other hand, since I suspect the US is very likely behind this strike, I can't say I care an awful lot.

DanS · February 10, 2003, 01:17

I'll be contrarian. I think he should prosecute harshly any sabotage of oil facilities.

Oerdin · February 10, 2003, 01:22

CG: I heard about the alligations of dropping people off the voter rollers but as far as I know nothing was ever proven. No evidience was ever presented despite the media frenzy that was going on so my gut is telling me this is a red herring.

I have to agree with you though that Gore was completely inept and the campaign was his to lose from the beginning.

monkspider · February 10, 2003, 01:26

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Not that Republican's illegally removing 91,000 people off the rolls in Florida and stuffing the ballots with absentee ballots had anything to do with it. Not that Gore's copmplete ineptitude at running a campaign had anything to do with it. Not that Gore's people's willingness to screw the rest of FLorida's voters by only demanding recounts in four counties (he would have won if he'd gone for a recount of the whole state) had anything to do with it. Yeah, let's blame the only major candidate with any integrety.

As for Chavez, I agree, this is a dastardly move. On the other hand, since I suspect the US is very likely behind this strike, I can't say I care an awful lot.

I'm with comrade Che on both points.

KrazyHorse · February 10, 2003, 01:37

Quote:

Originally posted by DanS
I'll be contrarian. I think he should prosecute harshly any sabotage of oil facilities.

Has there been much sabotage?

chequita guevara · February 10, 2003, 01:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
CG: I heard about the alligations of dropping people off the voter rollers but as far as I know nothing was ever proven. No evidience was ever presented despite the media frenzy that was going on so my gut is telling me this is a red herring.

The Civil Rights Commission head evidence about this and the NAACP sued Bush in court. The state settled out of court, agreeing to reinstate the 91,000 dropped voters, after the 2002 election.

In the US, the only place you say this was on Salon.com, but it had a lot of play on BBC, which is hardly known for fits of wild speculation. If the evidence on this had been dug up in Novermber or December 2000, I'm sure the media would have jumped on it, but after January they just dropped everything.

Urban Ranger · February 10, 2003, 02:08

The thing is, we don't know what's happening in Venezuela.

Oerdin · February 10, 2003, 02:11

The newspapers give a pretty good account. Admitably it's only the major events and we don't know what every man on every street corner is thinking but still you should be able to get a feel for the mode.

Urban Ranger · February 10, 2003, 02:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
The newspapers give a pretty good account. Admitably it's only the major events and we don't know what every man on every street corner is thinking but still you should be able to get a feel for the mode.

Which newspapers? US ones or Venezuelan ones?

Oerdin · February 10, 2003, 02:37

I imagine both.

Urban Ranger · February 10, 2003, 03:31

Imagine? The US papers clearly took sides during last year's coup, and they certainly weren't on Chavez's side. The local ones have been sharply criticised for siding with large corporations (thus anti-Chavez).

Propaganda · February 10, 2003, 03:46

Down with Chavez!

Oerdin · February 10, 2003, 03:50

It's also interesting to note that all the major media outlets in Venezeula are government owned. They're government owned and they're still anti-Chavez. Face it the guy is a crook, a dictator, and his policies have run the country into the ground.

Propaganda · February 10, 2003, 03:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
It's also interesting to note that all the major media outlets in Venezeula are government owned. There government owned and they're still rabidly anti-Chavez. Face it the guy s a crook, a dictator, and his policies have run the country into the ground.

He's damn sure no Stalin.

KrazyHorse · February 10, 2003, 03:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
It's also interesting to note that all the major media outlets in Venezeula are government owned. They're government owned and they're still anti-Chavez. Face it the guy is a crook, a dictator, and his policies have run the country into the ground.

It also shows that the guy isn't as much a dictator as he's been made out to be.

The CBC's government-owned, but that doesn't mean they're government supporters.

Oerdin · February 10, 2003, 04:06

Yes but the Canadian PM hasn't gone around changing the constitution, reducing the powers of parliment, dismissing judges who were appointed by previous administrations on the ground they were reactionary anti-socialists (translation: they disagreed with Chavez

), or threatened to dismiss media editors if they didn't start to print more articles that were supportive of the govenment. I also doubt Chrétien ever tried a military coupe to take power; unlike Chavez.

Urban Ranger · February 10, 2003, 04:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
It's also interesting to note that all the major media outlets in Venezeula are government owned.

Cite?

Oerdin · February 10, 2003, 04:13

My source is NPR's talk of the nation. You can check the NPR wed site and you might come up with something. I personally heard it over the radio.

Urban Ranger · February 10, 2003, 04:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
Yes but the Canadian PM hasn't gone around changing the constitution, reducing the powers of parliment, dismissing judges who were appointed by previous administrations on the ground they were reactionary anti-socialists (translation: they disagreed with Chavez

), or threatened to dismiss media editors if they didn't start to print more articles that were supportive of the govenment. I also doubt Chrétien ever tried a military coupe to take power; unlike Chavez.

You mean like that other self-proclaimed president?

Quote:

They even went so far as to endorse the coup's first government action whereby the self-proclaimed president annulled the Constitution of the Republica Bolivariana of Venezuela, changed the name of the country and dissolved all public powers, including the legislative power and the dismissal of state governors. The media quickly launched a campaign with an "Orwellian" doublespeak celebration of return to "democracy".

I always have thought that Chavez is light years ahead of this guy.

GePap · February 10, 2003, 04:26

The Venezuelan opposition screwed itself. Chavez outlasted them, kept the army's support, and will probably break the striking oil workers. (Why can one fire all striking air traffic controllers but not all striking oil workers? but of course mass firings of workers who strike is something only done by dictators...)

If Chavez is still in power it is because the Venezuelan opposition has no plan, no vision for the state, other then the anti-Chavez. you don't win on a negative. And if Chavez got elected it is because ther ones before him had failed to stem corruption and turn the tide of poverty (but certainly people do not vote on economic issues...)

Chavez is a radical who has created dammage to Venezuela. The problem is that the oppostion is as useless today as it was when ruling Venezuela. They need a third alternative, and probably won't get one.

Shi Huangdi · February 10, 2003, 04:38

"Why can one fire all striking air traffic controllers but not all striking oil workers?"

Nothing wrong with firing strikers, it is however wrong to jail people for striking.

Oerdin · February 10, 2003, 04:44

I second that firing is A.O.K. while prision is totally unacceptable. I even agree with Gepap that the opposition won't be able to get their act togeather and so Chavez will be able to continue his growing dictatorship like position.

DinoDoc · February 10, 2003, 13:00

Quote:

On the other hand, since I suspect the US is very likely behind this strike,

Does the boogeyman hide under your bed as well, che?