Ken Brociner’s statements are deceptive and dishonest. It’s easy to say that someone’s claim to being an honest scholar is “dubious” but then go on to say let’s just “assume this to be the case.” After 5 posted comments demonstrate that Ellner’s articles put forward valid criticisms of the Chavez government, Brociner repeats his claim that Ellner leaves out “any meaningful criticism of Chavez.” Ellner states above that he has analyzed in depth in important publications the “consequences of Chavez’s immense power,” but this doesn’t satisfy Brociner. Simply because the types of criticisms that Ellner presents of the Chavez government do …
- Joined January 16, 2009
- Last Visit January 16, 2009
IN THESE TIMES COMMUNITY MEMBERS
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
RSS Feed