raghu wrote: > How do you explain, for instance, that Chevez is > called a dictator while Evo Morales is merely called a demagogue or a > populist? > > Maybe it has something to do with Chavez's assertiveness and combative > demeanor that make it easier for a label of "dictator" to stick?
the more a country's leader deviates from the Party Line of the US foreign-policy elite -- or the more that leader's country's economic and/or strategic assets are valuable to the US -- the stronger the official language aimed at him or her. Chavez combines these. Speaking truth to power (being impolite, assertive, and/or combative) is one way to draw the elite's ire. In Chavez's case, my understanding that his impoliteness is partly a result of his effort to maintain his popular support; it's not just his personality. I haven't seen Chavez described as "insane" yet (though maybe I haven't been paying attention) but it seems inevitable. When the NYT etc start referring to a country's leader as "insane," that seems to be a harbinger of an invasion or sanctions (as with Manuel Noriega or Saddam Hussein). Of course, Venezuela has a bunch of oil, which makes sanctions or invasion difficult. -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
