Uh…what? Venezuela remains a bourgeois state, at the service of one bourgeois, not the working class. Hugo Chavez merely wears his red shirt to gain support from the working classes by exploiting some of the moral appeal of socialist ideas among the community, but his policies have been a complete support of the bourgeoisie, foreign investment, large state landowners, and so on, including his constitutional reform, made by him and friends, which was voted against by the Venezuelan left because it was only a maneuver to reaffirm the bourgeoisie as a tactic to gain more power. But Venezuela is not a socialist state, and Chavez is far from being a socialist, just as Stalin wasn’t, Mao, etc, at least in traditional socialism or, say, Marxist tradition, or left libertarian tradition, which are highly democratic. Venezuela is heading towards a very totalitarian social-reformist bureaucratic pro-bourgeoisie Government. I don’t see any control by the workers over production, communities, the institutions in which they work, etc. etc., I mean, what are you talking about?? If Lenin or Marx were to see what Hugo Chavez is doing, they would slap him in the face, even Stalin, who was a complete scum for socialism, would! I’m not defending Venezuela, Chavez or socialism, but people who love calling whatever sort of mixed or autocratic Government “socialism” without even analyzing if it follows the basic core minimum requirements of socialism need to think better before making this sort of claims, and abandon this little scapegoat once for all. Call it what you like, but I don’t see any prime example of socialism’s failure here.
And at what point do you not get that ‘democratic socialism’ is completely contradictory? You can’t vote what everyone’s values will be, and vote yourself the product of their labors. If people disagreed on things like who does what, or who gets what, then how does a vote solve that? Because it means that you know ahead of time what crimes you’ll be punished for? Oh, but it’s democratic, so there’s no punishment. It’s a voluntary arrangement? You volutarily associate with the commune, and you all lovingly vote for what’s best then are committed to the result? If you don’t like it, you can ‘opt out’ of the commune. Oh wait, isn’t that market capitalism? Idiot.
Marxism leads to violence because it’s all about compulsion and sacrifice. Sacrificing others. Even Marx understood that. I hate this post-modern neo-Marxist bs. Lenin was a monster, but a good Marxist. I do not apologize for my tone. You have to understand that your very ignorance, in the context of your attempt to evade a great and obvious evil, is a direct and violent threat against me.