Speaking of confiscations, part of the issue with the revoking of RCTV’s license to broadcast is that it has also included a court order that RCTV hand over its broadcast technical assets – transmitters, repeaters, towers, control centers, studio equipment – to the state TV. So it’s not just yanking the license, it’s taking over the station itself by another name.
As to Chavez’s legitimacy, etc.? I say Chavez’s policies are an example of what is sometimes referred to as the danger of democracies turning to the so-called “tyranny of the majority” – As in, a government is lawfully elected and its policies were majoritarily supported (in one case, opposition boycott means unopposed), so when it comes to pushing those policies, who cares about procedural rights, the people voted to establish socialism (or, fight terrorists, or, promote Islamic values) so any legal technicality that an opponent of that goal can use against it, has to go. Because that’s what The People want. For instance, Chavez has been warning the steel industry in Venezuela that its production should go first to satisfy internal demand and only then, if there’s a surplus, compete in the export market. That’s lousy economics. BUT, The People will cheer because if it’s “our” steel we should have first dibs on it, and what kind of greedy bastard will think of corporate profit first :rolleyes:?
In many parts of the developing world, “formal liberal democracy” western-style is having a rough time because* it was oversold * to the people. They were told, or at least *thought * they were being told, that if they dumped the old style military or marxist dictatorships and establish western-friendly politicoeconomic systems, there would be peace, freedom, prosperity and happiness. Small problem – those things are not caused by formal liberal democracy; they’re facilitated by it… if the players play along. If OTOH after a while the masses see NOTHING is trickling down and the fat cats are getting fatter, they’ll start to think they were duped and that what’s really needed is a system where the big players get cut down and put in their place. Part of the tragedy in Venezuela is that by all rights Chavez should have never arisen; that with its oil wealth it should have become the most prosperous society in Latin America at all social levels, the place into which immigrants would be trying to sneak in, where by the 90s the lower working class and rural populations would be on the way to a moderately first-world quality of life and looking forward to opportunities to climb socially. But COPEI and AD just sat on their fat asses taking turns in running the place for the benefit of their patrons and clients and directing the wealth into their pockets, so they were doomed when after 1973 there were no major steps to make the oil money trickle down more visibly, and a whole generation reached voting age seeing that happen.
What Venezuela needed was opposition to Chavez that took a stand for NOT going back to “business as before”. That would promise that even with the reestablishment of competitive policies and markets, reforms to bring the masses real social mobility and economic opportunity will proceed, power will not return to the domain of an elite, and **there will be no more no more “payback” in either direction. ** So far they failed to do so, and you can’t beat something with nothing (nor with the policies that were rejected in the first place).