Painting Hugo Chavez as a progressive hero
whitewashes the damage he is doing to his country,
says Latin America analyst VLADIMIR TORRES
By VLADIMIR TORRES
Monday, January 20, 2003 – Print Edition, Page A13
Posted on 01/20/2003 12:02:13 PM PST by Dog Gone
The president's other face
Painting Hugo Chavez as a progressive hero
whitewashes the damage he is doing to his country,
says Latin America analyst VLADIMIR TORRES
By VLADIMIR TORRES
Monday, January 20, 2003 – Print Edition, Page A13
It was easier during the Cold War. You chose a side; all that was needed to understand any crisis or conflict anywhere was to figure out which side was your side -- and the arguments to support that position were already at hand. Old habits die hard, and so in this era of sound bites, whoever says anything that vaguely resembles what seems to be your position must be supported.
Case in point: Venezuela. The world's fifth-largest oil producer is in the seventh week of a crippling national strike, led by business and union leaders who want to force President Hugo Chavez to call new elections. Outside the country, "progressive left" thinkers and media have made Mr. Chavez a newfound champion. Their analysis is oversimplified, to say the least.
Mr. Chavez was democratically elected with an overwhelming majority in 1998. This mandate allowed him -- through several referendums -- to dissolve Congress, create a Constitutional Assembly that drafted the current constitution, and to be elected once again -- as first president of the newly christened "Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela."
But democratic legitimacy demands consistently playing by the rules. And once re-elected, Mr. Chavez revealed his true nature: the former paratrooper head of the failed military coup d'état of 1992. Soon showing a total disregard for democratic institutions, he moved to gain a stronghold on the country's legislative and judicial systems, and to involve the military in a myriad of civilian affairs, even selling food at cost on the streets.
The President has systematically harassed the media, intimidated his opposition, and alienated critical sectors of Venezuelan society, such as the Church, businesses, the middle class, civilian organizations and NGOs -- those who now march in the streets calling for his ouster. His violent speeches are loaded with diatribes against "them." Anyone who is not a loyal supporter is accused of being a fascist, sometimes in scatological terms. (Despite his claims, Mr. Chavez's "little blue book," as he calls the constitution, does allow for civil disobedience; Article 350 should grant the general strike legitimacy.)
Mr. Chavez likes to paint the strike as a "class confrontation." That's debatable. The President still draws his core support from among the millions of Venezuelans who live in poverty. But now that more than 60 per cent of the population finds itself in that bracket, and the impoverished middle classes make up for most of the rest, his poor-versus-rich scenario makes little sense.
Venezuela used to have one of the highest crime rates in the hemisphere. Now that problem is compounded by the activities of Mr. Chavez's "Bolivarian Circles." These armed bands -- responsible among other things for vandalism against media facilities -- are organized and financed through government agencies. Although inspired by Cuba's "Committees of Defence of the Revolution," they are, in fact, nothing but fascist-like intimidation squads that operate with total impunity.
Ever since the events of April, 2002, when Mr. Chavez was ousted from office for 48 hours, the government has claimed that all opposition is right-wing and antidemocratic. This overlooks the fact that it was only thanks to the deeply rooted democratic sentiments of the vast majority of Venezuelans that Mr. Chavez was reinstated. In fact, those opposing Mr. Chavez include business and labour groups, and social movements spanning political parties and classes. Clearly, it is a genuine democratic movement.
Then there is the oil issue. When Venezuela nationalized its oil industry in 1975, a strong core of Venezuelan managers, engineers and technical personnel -- employees of the foreign oil companies, trained locally and abroad -- took over key positions. Ever since, the industry has prided itself on making promotions and appointments right up to the board of directors based on merit. Not even the most corrupt of the pre-Chavez administrations dared to interfere with that sacred rule. After all, Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), a world-class corporation, is Venezuela's main provider.
But Mr. Chavez, determined to take control of the industry, has been appointing his supporters to key positions. Now, facing the strike, he has decided to "cleanse" PDVSA. The government has already fired 2,000 employees and plans to run the industry with a few unskilled non-striking workers, the military, and technical personnel brought in from other countries. Mr. Chavez calls this "true nationalization."
To supporting such actions, the government argues that the current management wants to "privatize" the company to preserve its privileges. "Privatize" refers to the joint ventures and alternative deals -- already in place or planned -- that enable PDVSA to continue to be a world leader in the oil industry beyond crude oil extraction. "Privileges" refers to the fact that oil-sector wages are above those of most public servants (which makes sense if one considers their technical expertise and the need to prevent a brain drain).
Despite all this, leftists continue to defend Mr. Chavez, and cite his stance in many international forums, where he has come out against neoliberalism, free trade and globalization. What does that mean? He hasn't defined "Bolivarianism"; he improvises as he goes along, and has plunged Venezuela's economy into a deep hole.
Last year, the inflation rate was more than 30 per cent and the GDP was decreasing by about 10 per cent. That was before the strike.
Why do progressives outside Venezuela continue to support Mr. Chavez? It's a nice illusion to believe that with Lula (Luiz Inacio "Lula" da Silva) as President in Brazil, Lucio Gutierrez in Ecuador and Mr. Chavez in Venezuela, the winds of social change are blowing in South America.
But Mr. Chavez is nothing more than another megalomaniac colonel.
Vladimir Torres, a Venezuelan-Canadian, works as an interpreter and Latin America current affairs analyst.
Because he's a socialist dictator, which is what all 'progressives' (they call themselves 'centrists' now) want to be when they grow up?
October 23, 2001 - Chávez's choice likely to lose union-post vote*** CARACAS -- After winning control of most of Venezuela's political institutions, President Hugo Chávez will probably fail this week in his attempt to take control of the country's labor unions, among the last bastions of opposition. On Thursday, about 1.1 million unionized workers are slated to head to the polls to elect a new president of the Venezuelan Workers' Confederation (CTV).
`PEACEFUL REVOLUTION'
It's a vote long advocated by Chávez as a facet of his ``peaceful revolution'' to do away with corruption in the country's institutions and install social justice. But despite the president's triumph in last December's referendum -- which asked Venezuelans whether they wanted elections in the CTV -- the final result is not expected to go as Chávez envisioned.
If the president's handpicked candidate, former Caracas Mayor Aristóbulo Istúriz, loses, as analysts predict, it will mark Chávez's first defeat at the polls in the eight elections held in Venezuela since November 1998. ``This is a turning point for Chávez,'' says political scientist and author Anibal Romero. ``The defeat is going to be symbolic, marking a descent in the Chávez myth.''***
______________________________________________
That was back when Chavez liked referendums. Now he is blocking one on his rule.
That's an easy one, the leftists support Chavez for the same reason that they support the Palestinians and the rest of the Islamo-fascist dictators, they aren't capitalists. This should be a lesson for some of the international companies that think they can do business with the Third Way. The leftists don't let the fascist relationships it builds with global industries get in the way of their ultimate agenda.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.