Chavez Wins: "Socialism" Or Death!

During the days of the Pinochet dictatorship there was that joke about the Chilean dictator going on a state visit to Bolivia, a long-time rival of his own nation.

At a state dinner, the Bolivian President introduces his Chilean counterpart to Senor so-and-so, Secretary of the Bolivian Navy. Feeling slightly mocked by the leader of the landlocked nation, Pinochet raises his eyebrow and says "You have a Minister of the Navy?"

The Bolivian President doesn't bat an eyelash and responds, "What's the problem? After all, you have a Minister of Justice."

In that respect, if Hugo Chavez wants to call himself a socialist and pretend that the armed forces that currently hold the levers of power in his country and who swear an oath to defend the fatherland, revolution and socialism are the armed representatives of the working class, I suppose that's his right. After all, if Dick Cheney can call himself a defender of democracy, why can't Hugo claim to be a tribune of socialism?

There have been worse characters in history who have claimed the title of socialist. From Stalin to Pol Pot to the younger Mussolini.

But Chavez is hardly in their league. He's much more of a cross between Peron and Fidel with a dash of the Woody Allen character in Bananas. Make that two tablespoons.

I, on the other hand, venture to believe that Mssrs. Marx and Engels had a rather different species in mind when they were theorizing about a post-capitalist world and who might lead it.

But then again, Venezuela is hardly post-capitalist. If what Chavez has got going there has anything to do with the democratic and egalitarian notions that have inspired generations of socialists throughout history, please count me out.

No question that Chavez --utilizing all the state resources of an incumbent that controls ALL branches of the government, much of the media and manipulates the levers of oil-financed patronage-- won a clear victory Sunday in the referendum that will allow him to indefinitely run for re-election when his current term (and his FIRST 15 years in power) expires in 2013.

In broad terms, the vote can be called democratic. More or less the same as what passes for democracy in many places of the world. And Chavez was democratically re-elected president last time out. And, in case, anyone attempts to put some unsanitary words in my mouth, Chavez is the legal and constitutional ruler of Venezuela. Duly elected, lawfully elected.... and so on.

But he is the ruler. As none of the above negates or contradicts the rather obvious fact that Chavez intends to never leave office -- at least, not alive. His usurpation of any pluralism, of any semblance of debate and consensus in the most important levels of government is something that merits no celebrations and certainly bodes nothing very uplifting about the Venezuelan future.

Legal or not, democratic or not, Chavez is bent on and has effectively already achieved one-man rule. And that, brother, ain't got nothing to do with socialism.

Socialism should mean more democracy, not less. More transparency, not less. More distribution of power, not centralization in the hands of an ego-maniac who lends himself to five hour Sunday TV spectacles and who refers to any and all critics as "squalid...terrorists...and fascists."

No question that when Chavez initially came to power, his opposition was led by rather doltish and corrupt representatives of a corrupt and discredited oligarchy. What a gift to a demagogue like Chavez!

But things have changed in Venezuela in the last five years. The opposition has broadened and deepened, now extending far beyond its original right-wing and sometimes hysterical base. There are plenty of democrats, centrists, and even leftists (and socialists) in what is now a much more mature and pluralistic opposition.

And it's now their move. They have a limited historical window in which to pull it together and forge a credible, progressive, and attractive alternative to the brutish Chavez. Either that, or they should be prepared to have their grandchildren listening to Chavez rants and raves thirty years from now.

P.S. I am now going to contradict what I just wrote. I am willing to bet real cash that Chavez will not make it for another decade. He has given far too much power to the Venezuelan military and that will be his eventual downfall. The world economic recession and the plummeting price of oil, Chavez' failure to invest in a diversified economic development program, rampant corruption (and a horrific murder rate), will inevitably -- and probably sooner rather than later - lead to massive discontent. I would guess that such popular disillusionment (of the sort that usually lends itself to a yearning for an iron fist) will kick the doors wide open for a military coup by one or another general not anxious to go down with Chavez' dingy. This seems a more likely end to this story than an opposition victory anytime soon. I would not cheer nor support such a coup. It would probably produce something worse than the status quo. I just find it the most likely of outcomes.

This piece was originally published on Marc's blog.

Comments

[janmarbol]

another fascist like Peron and Evita... people just don't get it. Extreme right, extreme left, same crap different day... and it's not even about politics or ideals, it's about POWER [and its abuse].

[CitizenFarmer]

A friend of mine who was a part of Pinochet's economic team one of the "Chicago Boys", told me that South American politics is trinity - the government (does not matter left, right, middle), the military, and the Church. All attempts to unbalance any result in failure.

[leonel]

I have a lot of cousins named Chavez, they are very social and fun loving, some day there will be a President Chavez in the USA. Chavalo means kid or boy, Chavala means girl. That's your spanish lesson for today.

[PeterLackowski]

The notion that socialism is being "imposed from above" in Venezuela Is far from accurate. Venezuelans have been organizing themselves in neighborhoods, cooperatives, unions, and other forms since before Chavez was elected. Supporters from the beginning, they form the backbone of the PSUV today.

Chavez's election has meant that these organizations have had the wind behind their sails, with decent funding and grass roots participation in deciding how the money is spent. The result has been a blossoming of these organizations, as well as many new ones. Their activities have substantially improved many people's lives.

Not much of this activity is visible in the upscale neighborhoods of eastern Caracas. From that vantage point, all is chaos: bread and circuses and long, crazy speeches about building socialism. These people already had health care, plenty of food, good schools, and jobs. They don't see the improvement in the lives of the people in the barrios; if they do they deplore it as buying votes for the government.

Unfortunately many North American journalists are unduly influenced by this uncomprehending point of view.

Venezuelans are not passive people. Chavez is leading the revolution, but he is not doing it by himself. Socialism will not be built just because a government "imposes" it. There is nothing to impose, it still needs to be invented. There are literally millions of Venezuelans who are trying to create a Socialism of the Twenty-first Century. It is one of the most interesting stories on the planet.

[ente]

The comments here are very funny.One commentator tells us it's difficult for predators to succeed under socialism.Which inevitably leads to those pointless explanations that Mao and Stalin weren't really socialists because they weren't nice guys.Another tells us that the U.S. won't allow democracy in Latin America for long .Well what are Chile,Arge­ntina,Braz­il,Uruguay­,Bolivia,P­eru etc ,dictatorships?Why is it that expansion of social welfare somehow justifies political repression?Is the arguement you can't have better health services and greater literacy unless you have a dictatorship?I don't think there is any reason to believe that.No Venzeuela does not need Chavez to be it's leader for the next 30 years in order to progress any more than Cuba needs Casstro at this point.You can argue that an individual leader may serve as an agent of progess for some period of time but isn't there something inherently reactionary and hubristic about these presidents for life?

[tedpikul]

Listen to all of you children, led by Marc The Glib. Spend a hundred years having the wealth taken out of your country and then lent back at usurous rates and see how glib you are.

[SoutheastReview]

"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition." This is the thinking that a 'progressive' website of North Americans would place front and center. How about HuffPost? Inquiring minds want to know.

Thanks for this incisive and utterly lovely deconstruction.

[JacqueItch]

Chavez fears the reforms will backslide. Outside opposition from corporate America has been the dominant alteration to true socialistic reform in Central and South America.

Chavez may be perilously close to being defined by some as a benign dictator, but he is not yet there. He still believes that ultimately Venezuela belongs to the Venezuelan people, and the more he empowers them through educational reform, economic reform, and finally political reform they will be able to withstand outside or inside (read: military) challenge to their nation.
He is guided by the history of the region----when reforms don't go long enough, or deep enough, they do not become self-perpetuating, the citizenry may well need a full generation, 20 years, to get there.
And when global economics nosedive, the risk increases as Naomi Klein well described.

What I constantly hear from those who oppose socialism is that it is evil. It's not. But the people just as in capitalism who prey on others make it so. Socialism makes it much more difficult for the predators to succeed.

[donsadam]

The sad fact is that the US has proven that it will not permit pluralistic democracy to exist for long in Latin America. The long history of US intervention and meddling in Latin American politics is a powerful lesson for egalitarian South American leaders. The most salient examples are the CIA sabotage of the election of the Arbenz government in Guatemala, US complicity in the murder of President Salvador Allende in Chile, our invasion of Nicaragua in the 30s and the Bush's administration's blatant ouster of President Aristide in Haiti .Fidel and Hugo understand that opposition parties will eventually be infiltrated and finally controlled by the CIA. The Cuban model is the only way economic justice can come to Latin America. The US will not tolerate political freedom.

[arvay]

I agree that the US has sabotaged democracy in Latin America. The murder of Allende and installation of Pinochet was its lowest ebb. Bush's wars may have distracted and prevented us from interfering -- let's hope Obama is wise enough to have honest and non-interventionist relations with Latin America.

Unfortunately, the Cuban model is a dismal failure -- it's achieved a kind of equality by lowering the level of existence of practically everyone -- except party members, of course. Sharing the poverty is not the way forward.

Lula in Brazil is the viable alternative. He's milking capitalism to raise the living standards and educational levels of the poor. Castro wants to stamp out capitalism -- which is an ideological response and an old, shopworn and futile one at that. Capitalism is like fire -- very useful but needs to be controlled and regulated so that it serves the common good. You can't prevent inequality, but you can guarantee free education, health care and give people the opportunity to start businesses and increase the national wealth.

The European social/economic models are the way to go.

[UltraClassic]

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[Hector Palacios]

Hi, I’m a 100% venezuelan who actually grew up there, and lived in a tiny poor town, going to public school and such. Trust me. This is still very hard to understand.

I one of those socialist in opossition to Chavez, mostly because I can’t stand the accumulation of power. I’ve seen it in real life.

Chavez is not going to receive any new coups. He may be defeat in a normal election when trying to survive low oil prices.

And yes, Chavez didn’t create El Sistema. In my town there was an small orchestra before El Sistema: very unlikely. I still don’t know of any other town this size that had one. That orchestra was later associated with El Sistema. I was 10, I guess when El Sistema arrived my town. I’m now 33. I never learnt to play, but some others did!

That’s just complicate. Don’t trust that much your own opinions.

cheers

[terrierist]

Socialism is what right-wingers call sharing and mutual respect.

[conservativeisaac]

Have there ever been ANY socialists who've made a positive impact on global society? Any? Especially those who've strongarmed their way into permanent leadership positions, a.k.a., dictatorships? Hmmm... didn't think so. To hell with Chavez, I hope the Venezuelan people wise up.

[yappnmutt]

dictators, strongmen and tyrants backed by the military usually win their elections with 90+% of the vote. by that measure chavez isn't much of any of the above.

i bet he is sorry bush is gone. his constant taunting and making fun of the bush regime made him more american than most americans.

[arvay]

If there's an upside to our being pinned down in the Mideast, it's that we don't have the resources to meddle in Latin America any more.

Installing Pinochet in Chile and encouraging the murder of his democratic­ally-elect­ed predecessor was perhaps the low point in our Cold War, fear-inspired interventionist record. I also think the Soviets were happy to play games with the lives of the Latin Americans from their side of the fence.

So, maybe we've learned something? That people have to work these things out for themselves, that Uncle Sam is not their parent or policeman.

Lula is doing a great job in Brazil, without Hugo's clownish gestures or religious attachment to "socialism" as defined by Fidel Castro. Over time, the Venezuelans may notice this and vote him out. I really hope the army stays out of it.

Meanwhile, we can buy his oil, some of which he supplies to poor Americans at a cut rate (a real disgrace for our own oil barons) and not get upset when he flails at us Yanqis. Actually, I rather enjoyed what he said about Bush.

[indyleftist]

Yet another silly anti-chavez article that doesn't actually criticize anything he has ever done
Just a bunch of name calling and slanderous comparisons to murderous dictators

Why do you oppose democracy in Venezuela Mr Cooper?