"Violent" Video Games To Be Banned In Venezuela 420
An anonymous reader writes "The country that has bought Sukhois, tanks and 100,000 AK-103's, is planning to build a manufacturing plant of Russian rifles, and oppresses peaceful marches has decided to ban 'violent' video games because they 'promote violence and can alter the behavior of children.' The new legislation in Venezuela says, 'The violence found in video games is translated into the real world.' This new law affects people who sell, 'use,' produce, import and distribute these games. Video games as a whole have been labeled as 'a consequence of savage capitalism' by PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela), which is the political party led by Hugo Chavez. Days before this law was approved by the National Assembly, Chavez promoted the use of traditional toys like the Yo-Yo and Trompo, and suggested that electronic toys like 'the Nintendo' be put aside because they promote 'egoism, individualism and violence.' Just today the AFP released a report showing Caracas as the second most violent city on the planet — even more violent than Baghdad. I guess all those violent gangs in Venezuela are addicted to video games."
Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:4, Insightful)
Individualism? Oh, no!
awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! (Score:4, Insightful)
"The country that has bought Sukhois, tanks and 100,000 AK-103's, is planning to build a manufacturing plant of Russian rifles, and oppresses peaceful marches has decided to ban 'violent' video games because they 'promote violence and can alter the behavior of children.'
What the hell does this have to do with the actually meat of the issue? NOTHING. Nice troll.
banning video games.. (Score:5, Insightful)
was never about actually reducing crime, it is about enforcing morality on others and controlling what media people are allowed to consume.
Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug (Score:4, Insightful)
The United States should take the side of the oppressed there, not shake hands with CastroLite.
Because the United States has such a great track record of installing democracy and non-oppressive leaders in foreign nations....
Why can't we leave others alone and worry about problems in our own country?
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:2, Insightful)
A socialist country passes a law that curtails individual liberty for the greater good?
Oh my God how did this happen! The Left are the good guys aren't they? Clearly Chavez has become right-wing.
Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug (Score:5, Insightful)
Because the United States has such a great track record of installing democracy and non-oppressive leaders in foreign nations....
Ever heard of Germany or Japan?
Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! (Score:5, Insightful)
Mod parent insightful. As bad as Hugo is this summary is stupid. You could write a story in the same style about the US, and how they are the source of much pornography but is still trying to outlaw or severly restrict. Just pure trolling.
Please critize Venzuela on sound ground. It is not that hard.
Re:banning make hulk smash! (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! (Score:3, Insightful)
The ridiculous part about that line is that Venezuela spends significantly less on defense spending than Colombia, it's oft-foe. And the "peaceful marches" involved a freaking coup.
Re:Who tagged this "Fascism"? (Score:4, Insightful)
No, he is a champion of himself and gives a damn about anyone else.
Re:Gotta love the straight-faced hypocrite (Score:4, Insightful)
Guess I live outside of "civilization." Don't worry, I'm just as happy having a right to self-defense.
Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. (Score:3, Insightful)
Does this mean that this collectivism should be enforced by law?
European culture is more collectivist too, but the Europeans realize that this cultural trait doesn't need to be enshrined in law.
Re:Oh please (Score:1, Insightful)
C'mon. You've done a good job defending Chavez on defense and the general safety of his country.
Now go the distance. I'm only reading this comments thread to try and find out of anyone on /. has the balls to stand up and defend Chavez for taking video games away from his people.
Don't pull punches I'm waiting to see one of you liberal Chavez sympathizers defend THAT action HERE.
I wanna see some fireworks!!
Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug (Score:1, Insightful)
With Chavez's help, Obama is trying to do the same to Honduras.
Per the Honduran Constitution:
Article 239 - No citizen that has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President.
Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.
Gee, you'd think trying to hold a referendum on removing Presidential term limits violates that? Just a tad?
Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! (Score:4, Insightful)
I think criticizing Venezuela for hypocrisy, as the summary did, is just fine.
Just because the same criticism is also valid for the US doesn't make it any less valid elsewhere.
Re:awesome, it's get my troll submitted day! (Score:3, Insightful)
No. Your excuses are stupid.
No, you're a big stupid head!
Seriously, there's no need for name calling or putting down people. Your point is (somewhat) valid, you only weaken your position with derogatory remarks.
Re:Hugo Chavez is a dictator and a thug (Score:5, Insightful)
The people of Germany and Japan did this and succeeded DESPITE US interference, not because of it.
They wanted it to begin with and we opened the door for them. This is very different than the too many to mention examples of where the US meddled and it was not wanted and nothing changed, and in a few cases got worse.
Remember... Sadam was installed by the US as well :)
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:5, Insightful)
Any sufficiently far-left philosophy is indistinguishable from a far-right philosophy.
The reverse is also true.
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:2, Insightful)
Just wondering ...
How exactly does one promote "capitalism" as in the free and unfettered enterprise of individuals ... while eliminating individualism. That's a contradiction. How does the state "get out of the way" AND destroy personal liberty ?
And how come all examples of what you say are all left-wing. The ONLY example of a truly oppressive "right-wing" government is ... (<tadaa>) the national socialist party of Germany.
Oh wait I'm probably doing this wrong. Were they in favor of private enterprise ? Well ... no. Were they in favor of individualism ? Well of course not. Were they for or against massive government interference in the market ? Well they were FOR massive government interference. Say ... what exactly makes them right wing ? Well just about the only thing is the fact that they opposed the "true" left wing ... meaning bolsjevism.
So what makes the nazi party right-wing is the fact that they were slightly more center than Stalin (or Chavez), you know in the way that Osama bin laden is more tolerant of non-muslims than the taliban.
This is probably why all lefties are postmodernist. After all, if they are not entitled to "their" version of the truth, they must be very very bad people indeed.
Somebody who knows the score tagged it "fascism" (Score:4, Insightful)
Hitler was also a champion of workers' and farmers' rights and was democratically elected, undeniably influenced (negatively) by Marx, and a socialist to the core. The "S" in NSDAP stood for socialist, you know. Here's a pop quiz. Can you briefly state the difference between fascist and socialist (minus any hyperbolae)? Hint: it's a trick question.
As for "bane to American-style capitalist corporations", I simply think that Chavez simply favors his own corporations, state run or in cahoots with the state, as is the case with both socialism and fascism.
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:5, Insightful)
How exactly does one promote "capitalism" as in the free and unfettered enterprise of individuals ... while eliminating individualism. That's a contradiction. How does the state "get out of the way" AND destroy personal liberty ?
Take a look at the US and see how they do it. By granting enterpreneurs the ability to screw everybody else for their own gain (see: copyright, patents), they manage to both incentive the free enterprise of individuals *and* destroy personal liberties. Take it just a bit farther and you get corporatism first, then fascism, two extreme right-wing philosophies which you somehow missed in your effort to Godwin the discussion.
Now, I'm a right-wing capitalist, what in the US would be called a "libertarian" I believe, but seriously: stop pretending only one side of the political spectrum holds a monopoly over stupidity, you aren't helping your own credibility by doing so.
Re:Egoism, Individualism and Violence. (Score:3, Insightful)
You must realize that Latin American countries are far more collectivist.
No, we aren't. Don't generalize the whole population of Latin America based on what the Supreme Idiot of the Venezuelan Republic does or says.
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:3, Insightful)
What people's rights are, are derived from one's morals, metaphysics and ideology. Some people believe that the right to, for example, move freely is more important than property rights. Some believe that beaches can be owned, some can't. Some also believe that children belong to their parents, others don't.
If everyone shared a consistent view of what "rights" were, then there wouldn't be a problem. But any political theory that relies on a non-existent consensus and an equally non-existent standard of human behavior is pretty useless.
Re:Individualism? Oh, no! (Score:1, Insightful)
[In] a society where everyone is infinitely moral, compassionate and rational, [...] no government is needed at all[.]
This political realization is probably the single most fundamental one to be had when converting from "wishful" to "applicable".
People keep telling me that socialism would work perfectly, if only the people weren't so flawed. Then there's those that are convinced full-on laissez-faire capitalism is the solution, provided the people are ready for it.
With a perfect people, the system of government becomes close to irrelevant.
In the same vein, I find it noteworthy how both sides claim their perfect government has never been implemented yet, so you can't really say if it would work. I hear this both from LF capitalists ("true capitalism has never been tried, we came close in the foundation years of the States, though") and socialists/communists ("true communism can only work if the whole world is in on it"). Realistically now, both these systems will never be tried. They're ideologies.You can't make them true if you don't have complete, 100.00%, approval of every single living body. In any other case, they will be exploited, because they can be exploited.
Of course, this is true of every political system there ever was or will be, unless, see above, people are perfect. In any other world, you're stuck with politics.
This article is pure FUD (Score:2, Insightful)
This article is pure FUD and troll. The ChÃvez government bought Russian weapons ? Yeah. But why ? Oh, that's a question the anonymous coward will not ask. It may have to do with the fact USA put an embargo of selling repair pieces of military equipment to Venezuela, forcing ChÃvez to replace all the previous, USA-made equipment, with new Russian one, *just to maintain the level of its military*. Not to increase it.
The ones increasing the military in South America, who even bomb beyhond their border, who threatens their neighbours to do it again, is not Venezuela. It's not ChÃvez. It's Colombia, and the fascist, USA-allied, Uribe.
As for defending traditional games, and especially games that require more than one player (as opposed to most video games, of course, not all of them), it's a very wise move. Too much TV and video games *are* doing bad to people. I'm very glad my parents limited my TV and video game time as a child, making me read books, solve puzzle, play with legos, or a board game with my siblings. Any wise government would advise the same. As for yoyo, it teaches patience and dexterity.
So, what's wrong with ChÃvez ? What's the reason for this bashing ? That, being president of a violent country (that was the case when he arrived in power, Caracas was already a very dangerous city), he tries to attack the problem by several edges at the same time ? The police reform, the new reeducation through arts (music, theater, ...) policy, the Mision Vuelven Caras to train those people into useful jobs, and also, a very important point against violence : education.
And preventing children from being exposed to the most violent games and movies is part of the non-violent education.
I don't like bans. I'm not sure it'll do any good. But with the dreadful situation ChÃvez inherited from the previous, corrupt, neoliberal presidents, I fear he doesn't have any choice. The most important question, to which the anonymous coward has no beginning of answer, is "what is the limit of the ban ?"