Socialism in Venezuela has made illiteracy a thing of the past

A few months ago I got into a tangle of words and definitions about liberalism and left wing over the Guardian, and I fudged my side by saying the paper was not left-biased, at least by any non-US definition.The reason I bring this up is I did not have the courage of my political convictions and say 'So what! The Guardian is a leftist, socialist paper born out of the struggles of the working classes of Manchester in the 1800s'. No, I stated that the US view of left-wing was biased and derogatory.Well thank you Mick for highlighting an unabashed socialist state that , despite it's near neighbour's (and biggest economic partner) condemnation and vilification, has succeeded in putting forward a social agenda that includes the poorest and disenfranchised. Considering the (potential) economic power that Venezuela has, the working class has had little benefit from massive oil revenues, which successive (military, right wing) governments, with US military support and training, has squandered on armaments and self-agrandisement.The history of socialism is scattered with the corpses of well meaning and corrupt politicians, yet the success stories, or even the 'little guy against the big guy' stories are thin on the ground. Cuba stands 80 miles from the US and has suffered the perfidy of US foreign policy which baldly states it's intention to undermine it, yet consistently posts better standards of living figures for its people than many right wing regimes in South America that the US actively supports. The reason, a long standing, and pointless foreign policy (by both governments) that accepts values consigned to the bin when Russia hit the buffers nearly 20 years ago. [to illustrate - holiday in US - customs declaration on entry - Do you have? Firearms, narcotics, alcohol and a list of other illegal items, and at the bottom of the list Cigars from Cuba - not cigars from anywhere else , just Cuba] [WTF!!]Mick, we are going to get hit for this, but thank you. (well done at Rotherham at the weekend btw)

I posted 2nd on this thread and mentioned that Mick would take a hit for this and, lo and behold, the figures are argued, questioned and not even grudging admiration for an achievement independently assessed by UNESCO.A point that seems to be missed by many on this thread is the difference between political system and economic system. What many people are referring to (centralised control), in an economic sense, is a COMMAND economy. That is a centralised control of all aspects of economic activity. That is, what is to be produced, how it is to be produced, where it is to be produced and by whom it is produced. And then after production, where, when,to whom , and at what price it is to be sold. Yet this economic system could be implemented by any political party. The Nazis in Germany pretty much had this economic system in mind, fascists in Italy, Spain and Argentina also had the same idea.The opposite is true, free trade, ie the operation of a free market , allowing free movement of all means of production including labour and materials to satisfy the supply-demand mechanism anywhere with no artificial barriers, is rarely implemented by any economy, let alone right wing (capitalist) countries.I will finish now although I have much more to say, other than to finish with: why are people more comfortable with the leading industrialists controlling economic direction (who are not elected by the general population - and have a small base of shareholders to answer to), rather than a government of whatever colour (who are elected every 4/5 years by the general population and therefore have those to answer to)?.Oh and the first person to mention National Socialists with reference to the Nazis is a big fat idiot.

And the tea leaves are true with regard to predicting economic performance?If your last statement (quote marks not-withstanding) were true they would not be experts and Mrs Scoggins of 123 Anywhere St., Whatsisname would be economic advisor to the treasury.When experts state one thing you believe in and another you don't and you discredit them for the second, surely you should ignore the first piece of advice as well.Experts, right or wrong, have two huge advantages over you , they know the field and they use the facts.