Declaration of the Occupation of New York City October 5, 2011
Posted by rogerhollander in Democracy, Economic Crisis, Environment, Foreign Policy, Human Rights, Poverty, War.Tags: colonialism, corporate wealth, corporations, democracy, foreclosures, injustice, labor, labor rights, liberty square, occupy wall street, press freedom, protest, revolution, roger hollander, studets, torture, Wall Street, zuccotti park
add a comment
What follows is the first official, collective
statement of the protesters in Zuccotti Park:
As we gather together in solidarity to express a
feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together.
We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the
world can know that we are your allies.
As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality:
that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that
our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up
to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors;
that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but
corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the
Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined
by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place
profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality,
run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let
these facts be known.
- They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite
not having the original mortgage. - They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give
Executives exorbitant bonuses. - They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based
on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation. - They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the
farming system through monopolization. - They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of
countless animals, and actively hide these practices. - They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate
for better pay and safer working conditions. - They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on
education, which is itself a human right. - They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as
leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay. - They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with
none of the culpability or responsibility. - They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get
them out of contracts in regards to health insurance. - They have sold our privacy as a commodity.
- They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the
press. - They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives
in pursuit of profit. - They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their
policies have produced and continue to produce. - They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible
for regulating them. - They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on
oil. - They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s
lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned
a substantial profit. - They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping,
and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit. - They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control
of the media. - They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented
with serious doubts about their guilt. - They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad.
- They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians
overseas. - They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive
government ontracts.*
To the people of the world, We, the New York City
General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert
your power.
Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy
public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate
solutions accessible to everyone.
To all communities that take action and form
groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and
all of the resources at our disposal.
Join us and make your voices heard!
NationofChange has been an unfiltered media
resource for the Occupy Wall Street movement even while the mainstream media has
ignored, censored, and undermined the progress of the people.
STATEMENT OF PROFESSOR DANIEL C. MAGUIRE AT THE MEMORIAL FOR DR. GEORGE TILLER, MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN, JUNE 7, 2009 June 14, 2009
Posted by rogerhollander in Health, Human Rights, Religion, Women.Tags: abortion, abortion rights, ama, anger, anti-choice, daniel maguire, fbi, george tiller, injustice, justice, misogny, planned parenthood, pro choice, religion, roe v. wade, roger hollander, scott roeder, st.antoninus, thomas aquinas, women's rights
add a comment

I had the privilege of knowing George Tiller. It was a pleasure at the time, but it gives me pain now to remember the evening and dinner my wife Edie McFadden and I spent with George and his wife Jeanne in New York two years ago.
I would use these words to describe George: gentle, soft-spoken, courageous, committed. He also had a quiet anger at American terrorists and outlaws who would not leave him in peace to practice medicine according to American law.
Thomas Aquinas spoke of “the virtue of anger.” He saw the prophets of Israel and saw that they were bursting with anger. He saw Jesus angrily attacking the temple of injustice, overturning tables and Thomas concluded that if these moral heroes were angry, then there is a virtue of anger. It is a virtue, I would say, that most of us lack. Thomas cited this quote from St. John Chrysostom: “Whoever is not angry when there is cause for anger, sins.” Remember that quote. It should be in every church and court house.
Good anger is a virtue, said Thomas, because good anger respicit bonum justitiae, it looks to the good of justice, and those who are not angry in the face of injustice love justice too little.
The history of abortion rights in America is cause for anger. In 1973, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court gave women the legal and constitutional right to abortion in problem pregnancies.
Such a legal and constitutionally grounded right, is like the right to vote the right to go to church or synagogue the right to go to school. And to do all of that without being harassed, threatened, or murdered. That’s what rights are.
Starting in 1976, some—-not all—-anti-choice activists became outlaws. Since they could not change the law non-violently, they turned to violence and began a campaign of terror, egged on by right wing talk show hosts. They began by the bombing of clinics, arson, anthrax threats, and hostile violent picketing and physical and verbal assaults at clinics.
When this was not enough, starting in the 1990′s, they turned to murder and assassination.
The results so far in this domestic war of terror: seven doctors and clinic workers murdered………..one doctor murdered in his church, another in his kitchen. The suspect Scott Roeder said from jail that more such events are planned.
Sad to tell, this domestic war of terror has had an evil success. In 85% of the counties of this nation, there is no abortion provider. And we have let it happen.
This evening, as we gather in memorial, a single man, Scott Roeder, is held in prison in Kansas for this murder. The guilt, however, extends far beyond him.
The guilt extends to all of us here tonight who have not been angry enough to practice effective non-violent resistance to this very successful and malicious war of terror. In the memory of George Tiller I issue to all of us tonight a fervent Call to Effective Political and Non-violent Action.
Let me list those who, with us, share in the guilt of this murder:
First, I cite the police and FBI nationwide who have been lax. Reports went to the police and FBI during the week and the day before the killing about Roeder breaking the law and violating clinics. Absolutely nothing was done. In my opinion this screams out sexism. Abortion related violence is a WOMAN THING and it simply is not taken as seriously as if it were a MAN THING. In my view, if men got pregnant, clinics would be protected like an army fortress and police would make sure that no one would threaten or harass men as they went there to exercise their legal rights as citizens. There would be none of the current nonchalance.
On an almost daily basis, pickets outside Planned Parenthood offices and abortion clinics cross the line between protected free speech and violence. Violence is defined as harm done or threatened. Pickets here in Milwaukee practice violence by threat, shouting at clinic workers: “We know where you live!” or, with the same effect: “We know you Mary,” a tactic used by organized crime to intimidate. They scream insults at patients entering the clinic—in most clinics most clients are not there for abortions but to get the health care that Planned Parenthood provides for the poor—-and the pickets rejoice when they see these women reduced to tears. What they are doing is shouting “Fire! in a crowded theater,” to use Justice Holmes famous analogy. That is violence. Where are the police?
Conclusion: Every day that pickets gather outside these offices a police person should be there to arrest anyone who turns free speech into violent and assaultive threats. We must insist on this.
Secondly on the guilt list is the medical profession: The AMA and the Medical Society of Wisconsin and other state medical societies have sinned by their lack of outrage and effective leadership as their fellow professionals were murdered, tortured and harassed. Let them also hear this call to action.
Also guilty are the religious leaders. All the world religions, including Roman Catholicism, have a strong pro choice position existing alongside the no choice position. Both positions have the weight of religious authority and Roe v Wade respects that religious freedom of choice. It recognizes that the right to abortion is a religiously grounded civil and human right. Yet religious leaders, almost all men, fan the lethal fury of fanatical terrorists. Their pious hands are not clean when these people act out violently. Most of these religious leaders do not even know the openness to abortion choices in their religious traditions, and should be sent back to school. At the least they should say a prayer to St. Antoninus, canonized a saint in 1523, who supported abortion when a woman’s health was endangered, a common condition in his day. He was thus approving of a great number of abortions.
President Obama at Notre Dame called for “common ground” with anti-choice people. He was wrong. There is already common ground. It is called Roe v. Wade. That is the common ground for the law of this land and the anti-choice people are using pressure, threats and violence to prevent women citizens from acting within that law.
This is what angered George Tiller. This is what killed George Tiller.
This gathering this evening does Dr. Tiller no honor if we only shed tears and issue lamentations, but do not adopt the spirit of the African American civil rights movement. Let their cry be ours. “We’re all fed up. Aint going to take it no more……no more……no more!!!”
U.S. Democracy a Sham? May 1, 2009
Posted by rogerhollander in About Democracy, Democracy.Tags: american democracy, California, constitution, democracy, democratic representation, democratic rule, democrats, filibuster, filibuster proof, gandhi, government, injustice, majority rule, minority rule, political science, republicans, revolution, revolutionary change, roger hollander, senate, senators, US constitution, US Senate, wyoming
add a comment

Roger Hollander, www.rogerhollander.com, May Day, 2009.
When Gandhi was asked by a journalist what he thought of Western Civilization, he replied famously that he thought it would be a good idea. He could have said the same for American democracy.
Now that there is a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic majority in the Senate, there is much discussion about the necessity to obtain a “filibuster-proof” majority of 60 seats. Somehow the Republicans when in power got their program through with a simple majority. Both these data tell us more about the Democrats than the Republicans. Google the word “Republicrat” and see how many entries you get.
In an essay I wrote some time ago and posted on this Blog last August, (http://rogerhollander.wordpress.com/category/rogers-archived-writing/political-essays-roger/the-constitution-is-unconstitutional/) I analyzed the various injustices inherent in the original United States Constitution, some of which have been amended out of existence (slavery, women’s non-sufferance, etc.), and focused on what I characterize as one of the most undemocratic institutions in existence, the United States Senate. I showed how both in theory and in practice, representatives of much less than a majority of Americans control what does and does not get legislated in that astute body.
Since Obama does not yet have his 60 – only the goddess knows when Coleman will give up, and you can never count on sleazebag Lieberman – let’s take a look at the present contingent of Republican Senators, who have in effect a veto over the legislative process. Let’s see what percentage of the American population these 40 Republican Senators actually represent.
(I have taken the population data from the U. S. Census Bureau estimates for July 1, 2008 [http://www.census.gov/popest/states/NST-ann-est.html; “Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2008 (NST-EST2008-01”]. At that the estimate for the entire country was 304,060,000 [all estimates are rounded off to the nearest thousand]).
In the following states both senate seats are held by Republicans:
State Population
Alabama 4,662,000
Arizona 6,500,000
Georgia 9,686,000
Idaho 1,524,000
Kansas 2,802,000
Kentucky 4,269,000
Maine 1,316,000
Mississippi 2,939,000
Oklahoma 3,642,000
South Carolina 4,480,000
Tennessee 6,215,000
Texas 24,327,000
Utah 2,736,000
Wyoming 533,000
Total 75,631,000
The following states are represented by one Republican Senator:
Arkansas 2,855,000
Florida 18,328,000
Indiana 6,377,000
Iowa 3,003,000
Louisiana 4,411,000
Missouri 5,912,000
Nebraska 1,783,000
Nevada 2,600,000
New Hampshire 1,316,000
North Carolina 9,222,000
Ohio 11,486,000
South Dakota 804,000
Total 68,097,000
Let’s do the math. By adding the total population for the states in which both Senators are Republican (75,631,000) to half of the population of the states in which there is one Republican Senator (68,097,000/2 = 34,049,000) we get a sum total of 109,680,000.
This figure represents 36% of the overall American population. The representatives of those 36% in the United States Senate essentially hold the country hostage with respect to legislation (this is based upon the assumption is that all Senators will vote according to the dictates of the party leadership; although this is not always the case, it is not unreasonable to assume that those who cross over from each party cancel each other out).
36%. U.S. democracy in action.
In my original essay (“The Constitution is Unconstitutional”) I compared California with Wyoming with respect to democratic representation in the Senate. Using the updated 2008 population data, let’s take a new look. We have California with a population of 36,757,000 and Wyoming with a whopping 533,000. Yet each state has exactly two representatives in the Senate. One Senator for every 267,000 Wyomingites; one Senator for each 18,379,000 Californians. If you live in Wyoming you have 69 times more senatorial political power than someone living in California.
69 to one. U.S democracy in action.
So big deal, you say, that’s the way the cookie crumbles. Instead of whining about it, why don’t you suggest what can be done. In my original essay I argued that the Constitution seemed to establish the Senate in a way that it could never be amended. I am quite possibly wrong about that; perhaps a Constitutional Amendment could democratize the Senate or abolish it. But can you imagine that happening in a dozen lifetimes? No way, Ho Zay.
So what then? In my article I argued for revolution. If you’re interested, read the article. Here again is the link: http://rogerhollander.wordpress.com/category/rogers-archived-writing/political-essays-roger/the-constitution-is-unconstitutional/
Obstruction of Justice March 30, 2009
Posted by rogerhollander in Criminal Justice, Racism.Tags: bush administration, chris hedges, Criminal Justice, gordon kromberg, injustice, John Ashcroft, judge brinkema, judge moody, judicial lynching, judicial system, kucinich, obstruction of justice, patriot act, racism, racism justice, roger hollander, rule of law, sami amin al-arian
add a comment
Published on Monday, March 30, 2009 by TruthDig.com
U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema is scheduled to issue a ruling in the Eastern District of Virginia at the end of April in a case that will send a signal to the Muslim world and beyond whether the American judicial system has regained its independence after eight years of flagrant manipulation and intimidation by the Bush administration. Brinkema will decide whether the Palestinian activist Dr. Sami Amin Al-Arian, held for over six years in prison and under house arrest in Virginia since Sept 2, is guilty or innocent of two counts of criminal contempt.
Brinkema’s ruling will have ramifications that will extend far beyond Virginia and the United States. The trial of Al-Arian is a cause célèbre in the Muslim world. A documentary film was made about the case in Europe. He has become the poster child for judicial abuse and persecution of Muslims in the United States by the Bush administration. The facts surrounding the trial and imprisonment of the former university professor have severely tarnished the integrity of the American judicial system and made the government’s vaunted campaign against terrorism look capricious, inept and overtly racist.
Government lawyers made wild assertions that showed a profound ignorance of the Middle East and exposed a gross stereotyping of the Muslim world. It called on the FBI case agent, for example, who testified as an expert witness that Islamic terrorists were routinely smuggled over the border from Iran into Syria, apparently unaware that Syria is separated from Iran by a large land mass called Iraq. The transcripts of the case against Al-Arian-which read like a bad Gilbert and Sullivan opera-are stupefying in their idiocy. The government wiretaps picked up nothing of substance; taxpayer dollars were used to record and transcribe 21,000 hours of banal chatter, including members of the Al-Arian household ordering pizza delivery. During the trial the government called 80 witnesses and subjected the jury to inane phone transcriptions and recordings, made over a 10-year period, which the jury curtly dismissed as “gossip.” It would be comical if the consequences were not so dire for the defendant.
A jury, on Dec. 6, 2005, acquitted Dr. Al-Arian on eight of the counts in the superseding indictment after a six-month trial in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. On the 94 charges made against the four defendants, there were no convictions. Of the 17 charges against Al-Arian-including “conspiracy to murder and maim persons abroad”-the jury acquitted him of eight and was hung on the rest. The jurors, who voted 10 to 2 to acquit on the remaining charges, could not reach a unanimous decision calling for his full acquittal. Two others in the case, Ghassan Ballut and Sameeh Hammoudeh, were acquitted of all charges.
The trial result was a public relations disaster for the Bush White House and especially then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, who had personally announced the indictment and reportedly spent more than $50 million on the case. The government prosecutors threatened to retry Al-Arian. The Palestinian professor accepted a plea bargain that would spare him a second trial, agreeing that he had helped people associated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad with immigration matters. It was a very minor charge given the high profile of the case. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida and the counterterrorism section of the Justice Department agreed to recommend to the judge the minimum sentence of 46 months. But U.S. District Judge James S. Moody Jr., who made a series of comments during the trial that seemed to condemn all Muslims, sentenced Al-Arian to the maximum 57 months. In referring to Al-Arian’s contention, for example, that he had only raised money for Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s charity for widows and orphans, the judge told the professor that “your only connection to orphans and widows is that you create them.”
I spent an afternoon with Dr. Al-Arian in his small apartment in Arlington, Va., on Friday. His lawyers have asked that he make no public statements about his case. But we talked widely about the Middle East, the new Israeli government, the siege of Gaza, our families and the changes he hopes will come with an Obama administration. He sat on a couch wearing an electronic monitoring bracelet on his ankle, thankful to be with his wife and children after being shuttled between jails across the South and kept for 45 months in solitary confinement during his five-and-a-half-year ordeal. But he remains perplexed, as are many, by the gross miscarriage of justice and the ferocity of the government’s campaign to smear him with terrorism charges.
The government originally sought a standard cooperation provision as part of the final plea agreement. Al-Arian objected. He refused to plead guilty if he had to cooperate with the Justice Department. The Justice Department-including lawyers from the counterterrorism section of Main Justice-then negotiated to take out the cooperation provision in return for a longer sentence on the one count. That was the deal. He was to have been held in jail until April 2007 and then deported. But that never happened.
Right-wing ideologues, led by Assistant United States Attorney Gordon Kromberg, had no intention of letting him leave the country. Kromberg, a staunch supporter of Israel, arranged to keep Dr. Al-Arian behind bars even after he had finished serving his sentence. He blocked the deportation and subpoenaed Al-Arian to appear in Virginia to testify in an unrelated investigation of a Muslim think tank. This subpoena was a clear violation of the original plea bargain, and Al-Arian, heeding the advice of his lawyers, refused to give in to Kromberg’s demands. This led Kromberg to set in motion the newest charges of criminal contempt. Criminal contempt, bolstered by something called terrorism enhancement under Patriot Act II, is the only charge in U.S. statutes that does not carry a maximum penalty. The enhanced criminal contempt charge increases Al-Arian’s sentence from the usual 14 to 21 months for criminal contempt to a staggering 17 to 24 years for obstructing a state terrorism investigation. A handful of members of the House, including Jim Moran and Dennis Kucinich, have denounced Kromberg’s newest attempt to orchestrate a judicial lynching.
Kromberg, like many involved in the case, has also repeatedly made derogatory and insulting comments about Muslims. When Al-Arian’s lawyers asked Kromberg to delay the transfer of the professor to Virginia, for example, because of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, they were told “if they can kill each other during Ramadan they can appear before the grand jury.” Kromberg, according to an affidavit signed by Al-Arian’s attorney, Jack Fernandez, also said: “I am not going to put off Dr. Al-Arian’s grand jury appearance just to assist in what is becoming the Islamization of America.”
Judge Brinkema, in one of the rare examples of judicial courage during this saga, defied the government to allow Al-Arian out on bail.
The case against Al-Arian, in the eyes of the grand inquisitors like Kromberg, is a battle against a culture and a religion that they openly denigrate and despise. This racism, the driving engine behind the campaign against Al-Arian, mocks the integrity of the American judicial system. Let us hope that in a few weeks we will witness a new era. Justice delayed is better than justice denied. We owe Dr. Al-Arian, and ourselves, a return to the rule of law.
Michael Moore Needs Your Help to Expose Wall Street Swindle February 13, 2009
Posted by rogerhollander in Economic Crisis.Tags: bailout, bank CEOs, banks, brave new films, documentary film, economic loss, financial industry, foreclosures, hege funds, injustice, michael moore, private equity firms, roger hollander, unemployment, wall street swindle
add a comment
Posted by ZP Heller, Brave New Films on February 13, 2009 at 7:00 AM.
Michael Moore is about to uncover “the biggest swindle in American history,” and he needs your help. In an e-mail yesterday, Moore asked for anyone connected to Wall Street or the financial industry to contact him at bailout@michaelmoore.com with information about the economic meltdown. All correspondence with him will be kept confidential.
The activist filmmaker’s previous documentaries like SiCKO, Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 9/11, Roger & Me, and last year’s free release of Slacker Uprising revealed, ripped, and ridiculed gross injustices in the health-care industry, gun violence, the 9/11 attacks and aftermath, General Motors, and youth voter turnout, respectively. You can only imagine what he’ll do to the bailed out bank CEOs whose excessive greed and impropriety resulted in millions of Americans facing foreclosure, soaring unemployment, and $1.1 trillion in economic loss.
As Howard Rubenstein, president of a New York-based public-relations firms that advises hedge funds, private-equity firms and banks, told Bloomberg, “Moore’s reputation is locked in. Whatever he touches gets gored.” But this time around, Moore needs your help to tell “the greatest crime story ever told.”


Homage to Hugo March 6, 2013
Posted by rogerhollander in About Hugo Chávez, Latin America, Venezuela.Tags: chavez death, Hugo Chavez, injustice, Latin America, poverty, Venezuela
2 comments
Roger Hollander, March 6, 2013
I have lived for short periods of time amongst Cubans, for many years in Latin America, and most of my life in the United States and Canada. I have lived as one of and in the middle classes, with very occasional personal contacts with social and economic elites, and with a lifetime of close association and solidarity with the various classes of dispossessed. I think I understand the difference between capital and labor, between rich and poor, between oppressors and oppressed, between truth and lies. And I think that I can understand both the trite and misinformed responses coming out of the North American corporate media as well as the overwhelming reaction of sadness and loss that the great majority of ordinary Latin Americans are experiencing over the death of Hugo Chávez.
Perhaps it is instructive to compare the two rivals: Chávez and Obama. Whereas one loses count of the number of sides of the mouth out of which Obama speaks, and marvels at the capacity to lie with a straight face; Chávez was transparency and forthrightness incarnate, what you saw was what you got. While the North American corporate media and political punditry demonized Chávez as dictatorial and rabidly anti-American (the man who gave free heating oil to poor New Englanders), apart from the Fox news and hypocritically tea partied and toxically neo-Fascist led religious right, Obama gets pretty much a free pass.
Consider that Hugo Chávez never killed hundreds of innocent civilians with drone missiles, never violated the very essence of international law by committing and enabling torture, never violated the most fundamental legal right of habeas corpus, never spied on his countrymen in direct violation of law, never drew and implemented up a list of targets for presidential assassination, never joined with the financial and corporate elites to privatize education, protect Wall Street white collar criminals and banksters, and give in entirely to the corrupt and blood-thirsty private health insurance and pharmaceutical industries in setting back a public universal health care plan for years if not decades.
But this is not about what Hugo Chávez didn’t do (or to vent my disgust with Obama), it is about what he did do and what that means to the oppressed of Latin America. Although it is what most North Americans hear and think about him, his standing up to and developing independence from the political and economic hegemony of the United States may not be his most important achievement. What he did that was most needed to be done was to stand up to the poisonous and inhuman rule of capital. That he did this more rhetorically than in actual practice to me is not that important. It is a rhetoric that strikes a chord with the vast majority of Latinos who suffer from poverty, hunger, lack of fresh water, health care, decent housing, and quality education. In practice, as in Ecuador and Bolivia, he lead a government that for the first time in recent history was not in the back pocket of the moneyed elites, a government that took serious investment in health, education, infrastructure, housing and other social programs. That the financing of social programs depended to a large degree on revenue from petroleum is a factor that does not negate the successes achieved in these areas.
What North Americans are not for the most part going to hear or understand are the emotional reactions that I am witnessing here in Ecuador. When you are poor and struggling to survive on a day to day basis, when you are aware to some degree or another the injustices that are responsible for your daily suffering; then when there arises a person of influence and power and charisma and fluency who shines light and gives credibility to your deepest concerns, you are given the precious gift of hope, dignity and pride.
Hugo Chávez delivered such to not only the people of Venezuela, but to all of Latin America and throughout the world who suffer from the heartless hand of either national or international capital and the imperial governments who back them up with overwhelming economic and military power.
Hugo Chávez was not in my mind a genuine Marxist revolutionary. I don’t think it is possible to be both genuinely revolutionary and at the same time administer a government in a world where the rule of capital is universal. But to denigrate his achievements on that basis would be a case of unfairly splitting hairs. Like Chile’s Allende his government was as revolutionary as could be expected, and like Allende he engendered the hatred of the owning classes and the cowardly and sycophantic media and political classes that serve them.
In death Hugo Chávez will become bigger even than he was in life; and that is both just and understandable. For his greatest contribution, beyond the social achievements of his government and his courage in standing up to the Goliath Uncle Sam, is the honesty, humility and transparency he radiated as a human being and the hope and inspiration that his words and actions have given and will continue to give to those around the globe who struggle for justice, equality and dignity.
As millions of Latin Americans are saying today: “RIP, Comandante!”