Bush baiting aside what kind of leader is Venezuela's Chavez?

[Neurotik]

@BrainGlutton

Remember also that by Latin American standards – hell, by U.S. standards – he would have been perfectly within his rights to have all the plotters and participants of the 2002 coup shot for treason. And for reasons unclear to me, he didn’t. (Which he may yet live to regret . . .)

Maybe since he himself attempted a coup and only got a prison sentence and not executed.

[Sam_Stone]

@Brainglutton

Chavez, OTOH, for all his heavy-handed behavior and criminal prosecution of opponents, has not yet had anyone shot, and seems to be proving, pace Lenin, that you can have a revolution without firing squads!

I wouldn’t be too sure.

Darwin Arguello, an army soldier, Angel Salas, a navy corporal, and Félix Pinto, an airman, were reportedly abducted together in Caracas during the night of February 15. The following day, police discovered Pinto’s body and that of a twenty-eight-year-old woman, Zaida Perozo López, close to a highway in the state of Miranda, some forty kilometers east of Caracas.

The bodies of Arguello and Salas were discovered nearby a day later. All four had been bound, gagged with tape and shot repeatedly.

A fourteen-year-old girl, whose name has not been revealed, is believed to have witnessed at least one of the killings and to have been shot and left for dead. She is recovering in a hospital.

Arguello, Salas, and Pinto had joined a protest by dissident military officers against the Chávez government and had participated in opposition gatherings in the Plaza Altamira, a square where anti-Chávez activists have been camped for more than three months. Zaida Perozo is also reported to have frequented the square.

[BrainGlutton]

@Sam Stone

I wouldn’t be too sure.

There is ordinary, nonpolitical crime in Venezuela, is there not? Other than the politics of the victims, what reason have we to suppose that these (1) are political murders and (2) have anything to do with Chavez?

And even you have something to back up (1), don’t just assume that proves (2). It’s not even a matter of “plausible deniability.” Politics is rough in Latin America and leaders are sometimes quite powerless to prevent their overenthusiastic sympathizers from committing political violence. As I’m sure you know.

[BrainGlutton]

Good for a giggle: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060424/comix

[Larry_Borgia]

If you’re really interested in Chavez, there’s an excellent article about him in this month’s Atlantic magazine. I’d link to it, but it’s a pay site, so you’ll either have to subscribe or pick up the issue at the newstands.

[Mr.Moto]

I read it. It was very fair in its treatment of Chavez, which means in the end that it concluded that Chavez will likely be a disastrous leader for Venezuela.

[BrainGlutton]

Here’s an interesting interview with one of the government’s key generals, Raul Baduel, about the role of the Army in Venezuela’s political transformation: http://www.redpepper.org.uk/ (Frame-based page – scroll down a bit and click on “Venezuela’s New Model Army” by Hilary Wainwright.)

At one point, a large number of ministers in the Chavez government were from the military. Now Baduel says it is ‘just the ministry responsible for the distribution of food that is run by a military officer. Retired military officers are ministers for infrastructure, the ministry for the interior (home office) and tourism.’ While he is proud of the army’s role in social reconstruction, he is also at pains to stress its limits. ‘I don’t believe we have a messianic role or even that defence matters are exclusively ours,’ he says. How does the general see the role of the armed forces in addressing the corruption and chaos that is endemic in Venezuelan state institutions? ‘You are asking very direct questions,’ he replies. ‘But as the Liberator said, we must face the harsh truth. There are two major tasks. The first is to radicalise opinion and to educate people. This education must encompass people’s technical and scientific capacities so that they can contribute to Venezuela’s productive strength. The second challenge is to raise ethical and moral standards.’ ‘We have to set an example in our administration of resources, in our transparency and above all in being absolutely ruthless towards corruption,’ he says of the army. He reinforces his point by getting up and taking one of the samurai swords out of its sheath and swinging it in an ‘off with their heads’ gesture. ‘There have been colleagues,’ he admits, ‘who have not been guided by these ethics and in these instances we don’t hesitate to use the sabre.’ It’s time for another round of the black liquid.

Suitably fortified, I pose the problem that has been puzzling me all week. On the one hand, it is clear that Chavez’s programme of reform really has unleashed a process of democratic popular organisation in the barrios, at the base of society. On the other hand, at the top, there is Chavez acting on behalf of the people. In between, there are few credible democratic structures. People have little faith in the Congress or in political parties. There is a democratic vacuum – which is one reason why corrpution and bureaucracy continues, because there is no effective force to stop it. ‘Do you recognise this problem?’ I ask. ‘What is the army’s role in resolving it?’. ‘Yes this vacuum is a problem. The answer goes back to education. It’s through education that society can consolidate its ethical and political values. The army has to occupy this vacuum between the base and the higher parts of the state. But we have to be careful. I lament it but sometimes military institutions get involved in institutions that aren’t in their jurisdiction. We have to remain the servants. We have to keep reminding ourselves of our apostolic role.’

So the Army’s role is “apostolic” but not “messianic” – I’m a little clear on what those words imply in a Latin-Catholic political context.

Now Venezuela is threatening to expel the U.S. ambassador for actively siding with the opposition: http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=nation_world&id=4073416

[Mighty_Girl]

They don’t make them any more left-leaning than me these days, but I am not a fan of Chavez. I’d like to think of myself as having a fair grasp on reality.

I support Chavez insofar as he was fairly elected by the Venezuelans. I am convinced that they will come to regret it, but heck, they’ve come to regret electing every president they’ve had lately. Chavez told them what they wanted to hear, he had the good luck of having oil at its highest, thus profitting even if the Venezuelan economy is not doing too well.

Remember “popular” does not equal “good” in the long term. And to paraphrase an American president, he may be an asshole, but he is the asshole the Venezuelans chose to vote for.

As a side note, I know a Venezuelan whose family lost US$200 million due to the economic crisis in Venezuela (as defined by her). Their response was to close shop and get their remaining fortune out of Venezuela. I am not shedding any tears for my aqcuaintances’ family, but I am sure poor Venezuelans will come to miss the jobs lost because of this (plus the tax income).

[Stan_Shmenge]

He is this kind of leader.

[BrainGlutton]

@BrainGlutton

Now Venezuela is threatening to expel the U.S. ambassador for actively siding with the opposition: http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=nation_world&id=4073416

But they seem to have smoothed things over, for now: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-04/17/content_4433915.htm

[Capa84]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144

documentary on the Chavez presidency, with cameramen who were IN the palace when it occured…it’s long, I’m about 1/2 way through it, but an interesting look into central/south american politics and media control(Fox News would be right at home)

[casdave]

If the US does not like the leaders that emerge in South America, perhaps it should not create the conditions for such leaders to emerge.

Supporting governments which use death squads, organsising coups, plus all the biased and anti rhetoric instead of calm and measured analysis are not going to win over any hearts and minds.

I guess if there were no oil in Venezuela then Chavez would not be as important oto the US.

[Capa84]

@casdave

If the US does not like the leaders that emerge in South America, perhaps it should not create the conditions for such leaders to emerge.

Supporting governments which use death squads, organsising coups, plus all the biased and anti rhetoric instead of calm and measured analysis are not going to win over any hearts and minds.

I guess if there were no oil in Venezuela then Chavez would not be as important oto the US.

Especially since he is implementing much larger taxes on oil that leaves his country. In the documentary, once his cabinet retakes the palace, they get phone calls from military officers who are still loyal to Chavez, and are on the island where he was held captive…there was an American registred plane that landed on the island to take him into custody and fly him out of the country.

[randyjet]

@Sam Stone

Yeah, that Chavez is a real saint:
See, Geoge Bush is a monster because of the Patriot Act, but Chavez is a hero, because he’s working for ‘the people’. And after all, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette.

I see you don’t know any US history. The US banned the Communist Party when it was formed, threw members out of the country, jailed a lot of them, prohibited members from even leaving the US if they were US citizens. The list of illegal acts is too many to go into. When I was growing up in the 50s, the US government threw hundreds of CP members into jail for their political association. All this and the Communists had NOT even staged ANY kind of an illegal coup as the people on trial did.
It is also illegal to accept funds from foreign governments in the US as well by the way which is one of the charges. So I guess it is OK for traitors to take money in Venezuala from foreign sources, but not so in the USA.

[randyjet]

@Mighty_Girl

They don’t make them any more left-leaning than me these days, but I am not a fan of Chavez. I’d like to think of myself as having a fair grasp on reality.
As a side note, I know a Venezuelan whose family lost US$200 million due to the economic crisis in Venezuela (as defined by her). Their response was to close shop and get their remaining fortune out of Venezuela. I am not shedding any tears for my aqcuaintances’ family, but I am sure poor Venezuelans will come to miss the jobs lost because of this (plus the tax income).

I am fairly sure that the $200 million is in capital assets and not liquid ones. From what I understand, much of the problem of Latin America stems from the fact that the liquid assets are normally transferred out of the currency and country as soon as possible. It is near impossible then to establish a stable currency and development fund when this is done. This constant drain of capital is what keeps the countries of the region poor. So it is actually a benefit that the fixed assets will be taken over and this drain stopped if either the government or the workers of the enterprises take over the companies. Also, from what I understand most wealthy families in Latin America have off shore havens to stash their loot and they pay not a whole lot of taxes. I may be wrong, but I doubt it.