All Hail the World's Latest Presidente for Life!

Those of us on the liberal-progressive side of the spectrum can be thankful for the term limits that brought the malfeasance of the Reagan and especially the Baby Bush eras to a merciful and inevitable end. Both were popular -- even occasionally rising to immensely popular -- and Reagan left with approval ratings good enough for a shot at a third term. Yet it would seem that some of us seem to feel that when the shoe is on the other foot, term limits magically become undemocratic.

As Venezuelan journalist Francisco Toro has ably pointed out here and Marc Cooper reaffirmed in his post-referendum analysis earlier today, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez has long coveted the prize that aims to put him in the company of busily "election"-holding paragons such as Robert Mugabe, Alexander Lukashenko, Kim Jong-Il, Daniel Ortega, Hosni Mubarak, the late Turkmenbashi -- and of course let us not forget the magnificent flying Castro brothers. Now Chavez has finally wheedled the aló presidente he so wanted from his subjects, it'll be very hard for them to say adiós, short of a military coup.

Setting aside whether Chavez has been good or bad for Venezuela (in any case, the venality of previous governments made him or someone like him all but inevitable), allow me to haul out that priceless quote of General De Gaulle's one more time: "The cemeteries of the world are full of indispensable men." Even if you think the so-called Bolivarian revolution has been a necessary corrective tonic for the country, if it's such a good thing, why must it be yoked to a 21st-century version of the classic Latin American caudillo? Surely the chavista movement can come up with at least one other charismatic figure capable of advancing that ball down the field.

Ah, say some progressives both in and out of Venezuela, but the fact is that for better or worse Chavez is indispensable at the moment -- the only glue strong enough to keep the revolution together. Typical was Australia's Green Left which has written that abolition of term limits was crucial in order to "deepen the revolutionary process in Venezuela and Latin America, especially in the context of the global economic crisis," and while it admitted that "there is the need to develop a broad-based collective leadership," Chavez is needed for the foreseeable future because "this requires time to develop."

And thus do some of the same folks who were no doubt appalled at the recent prospect of a third term for their bete noire next door, Colombia's president Alvaro Uribe, suddenly check their judgment at the door of Venezuela's Consejo Nacional Electoral, conveniently ignoring the fact that no matter how beneficial the politics may or may not be, unlimited and open-ended power is never a good idea, far outweighing in the long run any good it might accomplish.

Developments in our back yard such as this and Nicaragua's fraud-tainted municipal elections in November serve to further underscore why it would be dangerous for the Obama-Biden administration to let itself fall into the pattern set by the Bushies, by and large neglecting serious attention to most of our hemispheric neighbors until a crisis smacks us in the face. Monroe Doctrine or not, the U.S. neglects this back yard at its peril, because even beyond foreign-policy considerations, trouble south of the border has the potential to spill over directly into our own country -- as Iran-Contra's abuse of the Constitution proved in the 80s, NAFTA's impact proved in the 90s, and the controversy over immigration continues to prove today (and one shudders to think what would happen should narco-violence get truly out of hand right next door in Mexico).

In fact, as the spreading economic crisis translates into spreading unrest in countries with the relatively shallow and/or wobbly democratic traditions of Latin America, the old witches brew of instability, demagoguery, dictatorship, and more widespread terrorism -- narco and otherwise -- could well be due for a comeback. Do we really need that, on top of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, and global economic meltdown?

Comments

[LovingHope]

How would you feel if there were people with beach homes and mansions, and you are homeless and hungry and can't even feed your kids. Although this land belonged to your ancestors, they have stripped you of your culture, and robbed you of your land. They have destroyed your ancestors and they have tried to erase your past, and virtually made you invisible with no voice. Only white European settlers have benefit from all this. If I was part of this indigenous revolution, I would definately vote for Chavez. He has given the native Latin Americans hope and a voice. I support his movement. Viva Chavez y la revolucion!

[RaymondEagleton2]

For more on U.S policy towards Latin America's new leftists check out Campus Progress:

http://www.campusprogress.org/fieldreport/3630/sin-cambio

[naluca]

Don't paint the Venezuelans as dumb or backward. There are millions in this country who would vote today to make Obama emporer for life. No country is as swayed by slick messaging as the USA.

[RoseMerry]

I had hope for this guy. I give up - just another power-hungry man out to hold on to power. . I cannot imagine anything more counter-re­volutionar­y.

[RoloTomassi]

In a democracy [or what passes for one; I don't think, realistically, a true democracy exists yet], there is always going to be concern about term limits and someone holding onto power simply for the sake of power.

But within true revolutionary thought [carried beyond the relatively simple act of revolting and usurping an oppressive power] is the very real concern--even within a democratic framework--of the oppressive forces reasserting control over the "revolution" before the revolutionary vision [if indeed there happens to really be one] can be fulfilled.

Say what you like about Chavez--right now it would be very easy to undo any progressive measures he has taken. It is only human nature to want to protect anything fought for and is perceived as positive by the majority.

It is a dangerous balancing act, to be sure, and I have no idea if it can truly be pulled off without some of the egotistical elements of human nature asserting themselves and overriding the original goal. It is reasonable to point out that Castro and other revolutionary leaders have taken the same attitude and ultimately lost perspecttive--but I do not believe that it is reasonable to condemn Chavez for his mindset until he shows himself to be deserving of condemnation.

Chavez's critics do a lot of hand-waving at the notion that the US is a serious threat to his efforts at democratic­-socialism­, but the threat is very real.

[greenworld1]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hugochavez/view/8.html

[av2ts]

These are stats recently reported by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR):

The current economic expansion began when the government got control over the national oil company in the first quarter of 2003. Since then, real (inflation­-adjusted) GDP has nearly doubled, growing by 94.7 percent in 5.25 years, or 13.5 percent annually.

Most of this growth has been in the non-oil sector of the economy, and the private sector has grown faster than the public sector.

During the current economic expansion, the poverty rate has been cut by more than half, from 54 percent of households in the first half of 2003 to 26 percent at the end of 2008. Extreme poverty has fallen even more, by 72 percent. These poverty rates measure only cash income, and do not take into account increased access to health care or education.

Over the entire decade, the percentage of households in poverty has been reduced by 39 percent, and extreme poverty by more than half.

There have been substantial gains in education, especially higher education, where gross enrollment rates more than doubled from 1999-2000 to 2007-2008.

Over the past decade, the number of social security beneficiaries has more than doubled.

Real (inflation­-adjusted) social spending per person more than tripled from 1998-2006

[tiznow]

With the price of oil falling the "gains" are not sustainable. According to Newsweek, Venezuela is spending down its reserve dollars such that without big cuts in government spending, they will soon fall into a deficit.

[av2ts]

Newsweek is telling Americans what we want to hear. In fact, despite the astonishing fall in the price of oil, Venezuela is well positioned with no years of budget surpluses and tons of reserves

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/publications/reports/oil-prices-and-venezuela-s-economy/

The authors conclude that Venezuela is unlikely to run into foreign exchange constraints in the foreseeable future, and can pursue expansionary fiscal policies to counter any economic downturn.

[Manouche]

Who, then, defines the terms? Is term limits also part of the globalization and cultural/values imperialism? Are you presenting facts here? why are you trying to lead people to a the wrong discussion?

What does Democracy mean Mr. Appell? isn't the man from the people? isn't the majority of people supporting and voting? Do you have any sense of respect for their decision? was the election about re-election or re-nomination for re-election?

I bet that because Chávez is an easy character to attack on the media for he is an extremely open speaker and he fears not to say what the people would say if they were on his shoes. To set a headline that Chávez is going to be there "for life" it's just an effective tactic to create controversial and get people to talk, but in journalism is just plain yellow journalism a weak and banal argument.

[euthyfro]

Long live the Bolivarian Revolution!
This is a victory for the proletariat masses who have at every step pushed Chavez further on the path of Socialist transformation.
Workers of the World Unite.

[greenworld1]

this is the best joke I've heard in a while!!

[HMDMSR]

I've been visiting this site for just over a year, and I still don't know what a "progressive" is. I'm aware that members of the Democratic Leadership Council refer to themselves as progressive, so it might not be such a good thing.

Alexander Lukashenko is democratically elected, and has sought to protect his country from the neoliberal sewage that's been rising at our ankles.

I accept all the favorable comments on Hugo Chavez. A good sign: Venezuela and Belarus have been developing closer ties over the last few years.

[way2muchsense]

The difference is, in this country, there is a mechanism for getting rid of a President who abuses his office. The odd thing is, it was only used twice in our history, for political reasons, and failed twice. The one time it was actually needed, it wasn't used. Still, if we were to repeal Presidential term limits in exchange for a progressive lowering of the threshold for impeachment, say 60 votes for the second term, 55 for the third (could we have gotten 55 senators agree that a third-term President Reagan had Alzheimer's Disease?), a simple majority after that, and also requiring that the Vice President also leave office when the President is removed (see Cheney, Quayle, Agnew, et. al.), I'd feel a lot better. I'd feel even better if the Speaker of the House were to assume the office on only a temporary basis while a special election is held. Short of implementing a parliamentary system with a weak president (or governor-general) and a strong prime minister, this is about as good as I think we can make it.

[RoloTomassi]

"The odd thing is, it was only used twice in our history, for political reasons, and failed twice."

And that should tell you all you need to know about the effectiveness of the corrective policies we have in place in the US government for dealing with a president that the majority sees as unacceptable.

We Americans love to point the finger as though we're perfect and everyone else comes up short by comparison; IMO, such unquestioned arrogance, accepted by so many, is the truest sign of a much deeper ignorance of the world around us.

[NABNYC]

Where's the analogy I'm looking for? The United States or its people criticizing any South American government is ... like ... Enron giving lessons on financial responsibility? Cheney lecturing on compassion? Rumsfeld teaching about personal humility?

The only thing the U.S. has ever done in South America is to fund military dictatorships and coups, train torturers and death squads to murder progressives, promote policies by which all the resources of a nation are stolen by U.S. corporations and the people starve, and hire local thugs as "pretend" leaders of the country.

The U.S., and its people, have nothing of any value or interest to say about Venezuela. There's nothing magical about our electoral system, or about two four-year terms. Chavez represents a true leader, someone who is awakening other countries through his example. Leave the Venezuelans to find their own way. We've done a bad enough job in our country that we don't need to poke into their lives.

[greenworld1]

How can any of you defend Chavez, having no idea what has happened in Venezuela under him?, even worse what's coming. How would you react if your government threatens to take away your beach or country house, because you simply don't deserve it. Or tells you that you will have to accept and welcome random families from the slums to live with you because your house is too big for your family of four?. What about having to share the custody of your children with the state?. What about being taken away your internet access and cellphones, and credit cards? What about abolishing private education, and indoctrinating your kiddos into communism? What about abolishing private health care and private health insurance? WHAT ABOUT NOT BEING ISSUED A PASSPORT? How can anyone, anyone!! think that Venezuelans and Cubans are happy with their government! they have become simply prisoners of evil. Not everyone has the resources to leave the country. they are stuck, by force. FYI election in Venezuela are never fair. Everything is a tramp, a scam, a cheat. And the money the country makes ain't invested in any infrastructure, or schools or hospital, is invested in Chavez & pals' wardrobes, whiskey, trips and mansions. The poor are poorer. The middle class died. The rich already left. For all of you, the only way to know what's going on in other places, is to spend time there, and see the reality, the misery that these evil politicians have created.

[vedder110]

references please?

[zaz33]

Links please

[greenworld1]

1. I'm actually from Venezuela.
2. You can get a hold of the constitutional amendments and see it for yourself.
Unfortunately the document is too long for me to post it here, and I'm still in the process of translating it into in English.

[apduncan1]

Put up or shut up.

[av2ts]

Metirosa! Lies and more lies. No one's house has been taken away or being forced to take in poor people. No one's internet, phones or credit cards are touched. Private education and health care is untouched (but yes public schools and clinics are being invested in). On and on. Lies and more lies. Even the anti-Chavez opposition admits the election was free and fair.

[piul05]

Chill out, this is one of those tro**s who sign up for one topic only and aim to cause havoc.

His/her pinochean narrative would be more convincing if he/she didn't overdo it.

[steamboat]

Wow, I thought I'd never defend Chavez, but here goes:

He is NO DIFFERENT then Cook County, Illinois. Have so many patronage workers on the payroll, as both Chavez's party and the machine in Cook County does, that you almost will always guarantee at least 50% of the vote. Plus, intimidate enough media, again as BOTH do.

[jast]

Chavez does not intimidate the media. Infact it was the Venezuelan media elites who participated in a failed coup, and as far as I know there is still anti-chavez media operating in the country freely.

and how is Chavez almost always guaranteed 50% didn't he lose the last referendum


....You do a bad job of defending Chavez.

[Ergon]

This reads more like an attack on Pres. Obama, but, here goes.
Any media calling for the assassination of an elected president, as Venezuela's did, will lose its broadcasting license.
Good.

[Skepticat]

If the Venezualans decide they want to remove term limits in an apparently free election so wot?
Meanwhile back home there are more pressing problems.

[apduncan1]

"Monroe Doctrine or not, the U.S. neglects this back yard at its peril,..."

The Monroe Doctrine was introduced to keep England, a country that was in those days against the slave trade away from the continent.

The US interests was to have a tropical zone for itself where slave labor could be used to grow cotton, tobacco and other cash crops. In its backyard, indeed.

That is the Monroe Doctrine. Plain and simple. A Doctrine that wanted to maintain the slave trade alive and prosperous.