Replies

Dear Jim:

I admire you a lot, but sometimes it seems that the inability of Hollywood stars to understand politics is directly proportional to their stage talent. Reagan was always an actor with very little talent, thank God. I read that you were invited to HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” program where you said: “We have to say yes to socialism, to the word and everything”. Perhaps for you, as for all humanity, the word “socialism” is a word that sounds beautiful. Everyone wants to define himself as a socialist, even those on the right: Rajoy is labeled as a “social democrat” and surely he is.

Socialism is understood in everyday terms as antithesis of selfishness, synonym of concern for others, of equitable distribution of wealth, of support for the weakest and their needs, of seeking health and education for all, etc. And that’s good, that’s what the First World right wants. It seems that this traditional division between right and left in ideological terms has been mutating, and what most disturbs people is that their governments are efficient, honest, that comply with their constitutional obligations and almost all constitutions contemplate a deep social content.

So, at least in developed countries, there are socialisms, with shades of left or right. One supposes that is what you meant when you say: “we have to say yes to socialism” and you set an example to that magnificent nation that is Canada. In that sense, I will not have to fall on you as if you had recorded a wedge for the Saime.

However, it is necessary to tell you that under the name of “socialism” deep threats are hidden today, curiously, against what is usually considered socialism, hiding a pure and hard intolerant authoritarianism, if not an open dictatorship. It is not by chance, Jim, that neofascism is flourishing right in the Germany that was socialist.

If we evaluate the closest case we have, that of Venezuela, what we find is just that: our regime is not - God forbid - the antithesis of selfishness. On the contrary, there is nothing more selfish than appropriating what belongs to everyone, from power, to public money, in that form of government that we suffer and that, since the great comet Haley passed, has come to be called “Kleptocracy”.

In Venezuela, dear Jim, - from what I have just told you - there is no equitable distribution of wealth, this has been concentrated, as rarely in our history in very few hands.

The weakest in Venezuela are in the good of God, fleeing the country as they can, without health, without medication and without food, a tragedy that is compounded by the denial of a regime that claims that the population had never been so good and that even the Colombian government should be charged for the welfare enjoyed by its citizens here.

That is. In Venezuela, dear Jim, the children are not going to school, either because they have to find ways to survive and help their families or because they do not have the strength to go to school because of lack of food. In Venezuela, Jim, we have seized the word socialism, it represents oppression against a people, the destruction of a flourishing nation and the desperation of its citizens.