Monday, 1 September 2008

Ken Livingstone with Mugabe's Venezuelan friend

(I know the second man hugging Chávez is Iran's President Ahmed Ahmadinejad, I just wanted to put a picture of another of Chavez's friends in the world, someone different from Mugabe or Ghadaffi or Syria's president or Castro)

This 29 August we could read in The Guardian a letter written by Ken Livingstone, the former mayor of one of the richest cities in the world.

You can read the letter here.

Here I simply address several of his statements:

"The idea that this country is a dictatorship is ridiculous – probably some of those assiduously promoting it have difficulty in keeping a straight face."
Mr Livingstone basically asserts that because he could see from his hotel TV set the critical Globovisión on cable and he could check we have some newspapers that are critical of Chavez.
The little things he does not know:

  • Most people in Venezuela DO NOT HAVE cable TV and cannot watch Globovisión.
  • Caracas plus Maracaibo plus Valencia are not all of Venezuela. M
ost regions outside the main urban centres are not reached by Globovisión or RCTV cable.
  • Less than 25% of Venezuelans have Internet access.
  • El Universal and El Nacional are newspapers that have always been bought by a minority in a country where those who read, read so very little.

Mr Livingstone does not tell you that a lot of high officials in the Chávez regime openly threatened people who signed the petition for the referendum for Chávez. Those officials said whoever signed against Chavez would be sacked. He does not say how Chávez announced the finger prints of those who signed against him would pass to history.

Mr Livingstone does not say Chávez has declared many times that if the opposition wins, there would be war.

Mr Livingstone claims Chávez showed how good a democrat he can be by admitting his obvious defeat last December. The former mayor does not mention Chávez said the opposition's victory was a "shitty shitty shitty victory" and that he would not change anything in his proposal and he would push for it later, even if it was rejected by most people (he has already passed several laws via special powers that were part of the points rejected in the referendum).

Mr Livingstone does not explain why the Venezuelan National Electoral Council has not declared what happened with 10% of the votes in last December's referendum, that the National Electoral Council should have published the final results many months ago and that it has not done so even if the numbers they provided in the first report simply DO NOT ADD UP.

Mr Livingstone does not explain why Chávez does not allow critical journalists or channels close to him.

Mr Livingstone does not explain the real meaning of Socialism, Fatherland or Death.

Mr Livingstone does not explain the pathetic Personality Cult we have in Venezuela, where the state spends millions in thousands and thousands of billboards glorifying Chávez as a successor of Bolívar, as the new great hero.

Mr Livingstone shamelessly says illiteracy has been eliminated to "UNESCO levels". That is not right at all. UNESCO never confirmed Chavez's assertions. As you can read in The Economist, this is a big, big fib. Venezuela's literacy rate in 1998 was around 93% and growing. After some years, Chávez claimed it had been reduced to 0%, something not even Germany has managed to do and definitely not the UK. As that was not credible, Chavez and his cronies mentioned other numbers..."well, we have brought literacy to something in the ninety%". Hello? What is difference from 93% in 1997? And then they have had to concede hundreds of thousands of the people who registered for the Unified Socialist Party of Venezuela cannot read or write. Mr Livingstone does not say either that now Venezuela has pulled out of open evaluation tests of education levels, as those promoted by UNESCO. He does not say Venezuela is one of the few countries in Latin America that do not take part in the PISA programme.

Mr Livingstone talks about the old rich, but he does not talk about the Boliburgueses, about the Kaufmans and the Antonini Wilsons, about the ministers who claim this is a true socialist government while wearing the most expensive clothes.

Mr Livingstone claims Chávez has introduced a "new free healthcare system", when he does not know the state of public hospitals (already free before Chávez).

Mr Livingstone mentions crime very briefly, but he does not mention the murder rate in Venezuela has increased over 300% since 1998, more than in any other country in Latin America, including Mexico. He does not mention either the 8 ministers of Justice Venezuela has had since 1999 have lied month after month about the murder rates, that they have claimed the murder rate is down because they compare one isolated weekend to another or one region during a couple of days suitable for their pseudo-statistical analysis. He does not want to say Venezuela's government stopped sending the number of murders in 2003 to United Nation's Office on Drugs and Crime when it became too clear crime was out of control in Venezuela.

Mr Livingstone does not explain exactly what has been achieved with the money poor Venezuela invested in one of the richest cities in the world.

Mr Livingstone tries to make Britons believe most of the opposition are evil rich people who dislike the poor. That is like saying most Britons who do not like Mr Livingstone are neo-Nazis and as proof he chooses some fringe neo-Nazi group.
What kind of tactic is that? If some Venezuelan were to tell Britons everybody who is not with Mr Livingstone/Cameron/Blair/you-name-him or her is a Nazi or that he is just some kind of selfish monster, I think Britons would be very angry and feel that Venezuelan does not know what respect and honesty are.

Shame on you, Mr Livingstone.


  1. Hola Kepler,

    I really have no words for this man Livingstone. You know the words from H.M. Stanley when he was searching in Africa and then he saw a white man "Dr. Livingstone, I presume?"

    I can say this to this man too, but then presuming that Livingstone means a bad word.

    Let's be creative like you are saying in "leave your Comment"

    The man is "rule 2" and "rule 2" and "rule 2"

    And for me he was living in a cave.
    It is a disgrace that this man was a mayor in London. I like to show this man the real Venezuela.

    Thanks for this post and I hope that they nail him in The English newspapers


  2. It's LivingstonE.


  3. Anonymous,

    Thanks for the correction.

    Indeed, the horror...I have wondered what has moved Ken Levingstone. Is it all political calculation? Is it bitterness? How ignorant can he be about all those issues like the lies on literacy, about how the Boliburguesía works, about the political apartheid in Venzuela?
    How much does he know and he prefers to hide just because he cannot backtrack and he needs to "protect his image"?

  4. Hi Kepler, not to forget, Livingstone is that rat that took a few millions of Chavez to sponsore the Bustickets in London! How said Boris Johnson? (after 4:30 minutes, and in the end Boris Johnson)

  5. Hola Kepler,

    Livingstone is the living proof of ignorance and robbery.
    They will cheat there family for money.

  6. Hello, Hans. Thanks for the link. I meant that when I talked about the poor's money in London. I added your link to that sentence.
    I apologized for the editing. I just wrote the post enraged very late yesterday.

  7. Alpha, I do not know why exactly Ken Levingstone can write such stupid things, but in any case his attitude is shocking.

  8. You can not gain respectability if you start out lying with the info you publish. Example: when you wrote "Most people in Venezuela DO NOT HAVE cable TV and cannot watch Globovisión" you are being sooo manipulative and so dishonest!!! GLOBOVISION is an open UHF signal available everywhere its open signal can reach!! In the Caracas metropolitan area it is channel 33. Even further, all you have to do is look up to the slums (barrios) and start counting the great number of DirectTV dishes facing west. So, the reason we have Chavez, and it looks as if we're going to have him for some time, is that the "opposition" is a mirror image of all it criticizes. They play the same games, have the same behaviour that the "chavistas". The difference is that the opposition elites have been at it since the 1960's....

  9. Anonymous, as I said: Venezuela is not Caracas. I repeat for you to understand: Venezuela is NOT Caracas. It seems you have not gone out of Caracas-Valencia-Morrocoy and Gran Sabana.

    It is not a coincidence the referendum was rejected in most major urban areas, thus in areas like Caracas. One of the reasons why Chavez was so keen on "not renewing the RCTV license" was because RCTV was the only TV channel to reach every corner of Venezuela. Now that is not the case. Perhaps your "amigos" have access to Internet, but most people in the countryside do not, nor cable. Those dishes you don't find in Parapara or in Güigüe.

    Try to watch Globovision in the towns of Guárico and Cojedes, of Barinas and Apure, of Portuguesa and Amazonas and Delta Amacuro, of Trujillo and most of Bolivar.

    I have discussed this before in Caracas Chronicles. I also put a map showing the municipalities where Chavismo lost in December: all around big cities.

    Anonymous, another thing: "the opposition" is a much more varied group than Chavismo. Chavismo is all behind Chavez and everything he says. Divergence is not tolerated. The personality cult is even worse than what we have during the Juan Vicente Gomez times.
    Venezuela was always a corrupt country, but Chavistas pseudo-socialists have taken this to unseen levels.
    The little transparency there was is gone. Why do you think Venezuela stopped sending murder rate figures to United Nations?

  10. One thing: urbanization in Venezuela is very high and Globovision has reach in the most populous areas, even if not complete. Still like that, it does not cover 50% of the population, not via open signal and cable combined.
    I will come later on that in another post.

  11. I have to go now, but take a look at this map:
    Try to guess what reach Globovision, El Nacional, El Universal have in the areas that are in red. No, not in your friends' haciendas, but in the houses of the normal poor there.
    Those red areas make up around 49% of the total population (not everybody in blue has Globovision access, not everyone in red areas have no access)

  12. Having mostly lived out of the urban populated areas of Venezuela, I must say that Kepler is correct. Once you leave the major cities, their is no coverage of Globo or much access, if any, to internet. I have lived in Estado Bolivar and Estado Amazonas and can verify this personally.


1) Try to be constructive and creative. The main goal of this blog is not to bash but to propose ideas and, when needed, to denounce
2) Do not use offensive language
3) Bear in mind that your comments can be edited or deleted at the blogger's sole discretion
4) If your comment would link back to a site promoting hatred of ethnic groups, nations, religions or the like, don't bother commenting here.
5) Read point 4 again