I suppose by definition and the law of opposites one person’s hero is another person’s dictator (anti-hero) and Hugo Chavez is certainly no different, a man who inspires both adulation and loathing at home and abroad. So is Hugo Chavez a hero or a dictator?

One thing is certain and that is that supporters view him as a socialist liberator, hailing him for promoting Latin American integration, for being an enemy of imperialism and neoliberalism, empowering Venezuela’s poor and indigenous communities, and reducing poverty and unemployment. Meanwhile critics of Chávez in Venezuela and the United States, claim that the Chávez government is leading Venezuela in an authoritarian direction, with Chavez himself becoming a dictator, abandoning democratic tradition, extending state control over the economy, eliminating dissent, and carrying out “social programs that will set Venezuela back”.
Most of us have been in Chris Tucker’s shoes before. How frustrating is not being able to effectively express yourself? (Keeping in mind that it is possible to be misunderstood by someone who shares the same tongue with double entendres, sarcasm and nuances) Language barriers are probably the largest obstacles when people from different places come together. That being said, common languages are the glue that hold many societies together. And further still, all is not lost as it is possible to communicate without words. Body language, gestures and facial expressions speak volumes that words can never articulate. Those are the universal communications – the lowest common denominator. Language barriers also make for a funny premise; just see below.
From my understanding, a social construct is a system of interpretations (and corresponding behaviour) that comes into being because people collectively choose to follow it for any number of reasons. Stereotypes based on identity are powerful social constructs and Sacha Baron Cohen plays on them with both the Ali G and Borat characters. He satirically plays the ignorant hip hopper and foreign idiot stereotypes to a hilarious tee. Let’s think about it though…
I have long contemplated the meaning of that phrase; is it better to master one subject or skill so as to achieve a level of excellence that most cannot? Or is it better to try to gather as many different skills as possible? When I say is it better, I suppose I mean ‘better’ in a number of senses.

Firstly, does being a master at one skill bring you greater life satisfaction than somebody who is reasonably good at a lot of skills? For example, to become a martial arts master requires years of commitment, if not a whole life time before one acquires the skills that can lead them to being called master.
© 2007-11 Aspecks Ltd. All rights reserved. Designed with love by Kaizen Designs