Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

68(P) - Confidante of 'Tyrants': Venezuela, Oil, and Hugo Chávez ft. Eva Golinger (Patreon)

Published:
2019-01-13 17:05:00
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Downloads

  • TMBS_19_01_13_Eva_Golinger.mp3

Missing 1 file, as this post has not yet been imported.

Content

Attorney and author Eva Golinger (@EvaGolinger) joins us this week to discuss Hugo Chavez and powerful leaders in general. How she ended up meeting figures like Hugo Chavez, Muammar Gaddafi. Eva's time in Venezuela in the turmoil that led to Chavez rising to power. The US involvement in supporting opposition groups and coups in Venezuela. Eva's time on the Axis of Evil tour in 2010. What Eva saw in the human side of these powerful men.

Check our Eva's book, "Confidante of 'Tyrants': The Story of the American Woman Trusted by the US's Biggest Enemies." (2018)

Comments

Mark Allen Kennedy II

He did have bipolar depression. That sort of illness is a bitch.

Bijou Smith

Wow. So if Venezuela simply upheld their constitution their oligarchs who are causing the food shortages would all be imprisoned for human rights violations, right? Our period in human history will seem laughable and bizarre to future generations in how we imprison people for recreational drug use and activist protesting but not for human rights violations, war crimes and financial fraud.

Bijou Smith

From accounts of two of my mentors, both who came into contact with him, there were few people as evil as Ariel Sharon. But there is contingent and banal evil and there is *base evil*. The former banal, the latter designed and deliberate. I would not know how to characterize Gadaffi, perhaps accidentally evil, Putin seems more on the baser end of the spectrum, but I've never thought of Chavez as all that bad. The problem is that to combat neoliberalism and fascism a strongman type of leader like Chavez is less likely to leave in place a robust leftist structure that is self-sustaining. Lula did better, but even in Brazil it is not yet clear that a strong leftist democracy movement will succeed in ousting the new fascists. The more I see efforts to eliminate neoliberalism fail the more I think charismatic leaders are not the answer. Sweeping mass movements devoted to peace and democracy seem like the only viable future political force for the left. I think Sanders and Corbyn, for example, know this, and will do the right thing in not making the movements they represent any sort of cult of leadership personality. It was great to hear Golinger basically confirm this, to hear her talk about the huge problems with leftist leadership cults. Such cultism (Putin, Maduro, Morales,.. etc) does not really damage the right wing plutocracy project and if anything enhances them, but when it breaks to the left it seriously damages leftist causes. I love Lula too, but honestly, he should never have had the need to run for President a third time, PT should have had good people in place to continue the Brazilian social democracy project. I guess they did to some extent, in Haddad, but the charisma factor is so stupidly dominant. I think Jamie Peck noted this on MR a few times. It's stupid, but part of our reality unfortunately. This is why I have so much hope in the leftist movements behind Sanders and Corbyn, because those old dudes have no charisma on the level of Lula or Chavez, or at least a different sort of charisma --- the simple charisma of being trustworthy --- they will inspire followers who will hopefully not need to be X-factor charismatic either, but rather just honest, sincere and kind, and eventually we (as a society) should then be able to mostly get rid of the charisma X-factor when electing our politicians.

Ryan Reffner

I hear way too much talk about Venezuela (and Chavez) with no historical context, especially in terms of US intervention and its recent politics. This is a really important discussion, and I'm glad Golinger is here to put everything in context.

J P 3

Very good interview -- also left a lot of fertile ground for more examination. I will be curious to hear a more fully fleshed out discussion regarding the line of succession questions. e.g. the risks in building a movement around a single charismatic individual and the failure to cultivate successors. The Brazil case is one where there actually was a hand-off successfully, even if the ultimate outcome is still an open question. Uruguay might also merit some discussion. The absence of proven oil reserves and the development of other industries may have been a blessing in that particular case.

Reginald Meisler

What I think Chavez should be most credited for is the largest experiment in radical democracy in human history (as far as I know). Surprising that Murray Bookchin never mentions the absolutely massive number of people's assemblies that Chavez encouraged as a means of developing something closer to bottom-up democracy.

twisted tea cozy

this isn't related to the content of the interview--just wanted to mention that the recording sounds kinda choppy to me. Did anyone else notice this, or is it something on my end?