Chavez: Not great, but not that bad
Okay, this has been bugging me for a while and, since the media has a major outrage erection about it right now, I thought it would be a good blog post thing. So el presidente, Hugo Chavez, is trying to get some reforms to the Venezuelan constitution passed that, according to every news show I watched this morning, will make him “dictator for life”. However, this is just another instance of the media misleading the public. The specific reform they’re talking about is Chavez’s move to remove the presidential term limit. I should mention that, from an ideological perspective, I think this is a bad move on Hugo’s part, but saying that it makes him dictator for life is lying by omission.
UPDATE: The purposed amendments have been defeated by a 2 point margin of the Venezuelan peeps. So, Hugo’s having a terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad day.
Chavez isn’t ending elections in Venezuela, so he only stays in power as long as the Venezuelan people keep electing him to serve. Yes, removing the presidential term limit gives him greater access to long term power, but his power still finds its origins among the people.
What isn’t getting mentioned at all is the fact that, until 1951, the United States didn’t have presidential term limits. A Venezuela without term limits on the executive makes Chavez no more a dictator than Franklin Roosevelt or the founding fathers.
So, the media is all hot and bothered about Chavez because he is pretty… uh… spirited in his criticism of the US and our crazy-ass policies. That seems pretty obvious, but it underscores the need to take everything CNN, MSNBC, Fox, whatever says at face value. They’re the big corporate media and they, like er’body else, are biased out the ass.
So, moral of the story, read alternative media. Democracy Now is a good one and they have an audio and video version of their kick-ass podcast and Amy Goodman, the host, is like you’re crazy feminist, commie aunt who you always want to sit next to at Thanksgiving, because she’ll tell you stories about smoking pot with Black Panthers in the Sixties. Also, CounterPunch.org and CommonDreams.org are pretty good. The International Socialist Organization, which I worked with in Chicago, publishes a news paper called Socialist Worker that can be really good, but should be read with the understanding that it is the ISO’s organ, so it is written by ISO members and espouses their politics. Therefore, if you’re some McCarthy-asshole-wannabe, you probably won’t like it.
So, I guess I sort of lied, in that the moral isn’t to read alternative media, but to pick the bias you like and stick to it. But read other stuff too. But know what your reading. But maybe I should stop telling you what to do and you should do whatever the hell you want. Just don’t freak out about Hugo. He’s not that bad. (Yet?)
Evan wrote:
i dont know if this counts as a reason to not like hugo chavez, but i saw him in the hall the other day and i gave him the little head nod and he clearly saw me, but HE TOTALLY ACTED LIKE HE DIDNT EVEN KNOW ME. how stuck up is that, right? i dont need him neither! but you know, its cool, i got plenty of other friends.
CHANCE NO ONE EVER HAS ANYTHING GOOD TO SAY IN RESPONSE TO YOUR POSTS!
Posted on 03-Dec-07 at 11:07 am | Permalink
Joel wrote:
(Originally posted by Tim H, but I (Joel) accidently marked as spam and it was deleted. In my defense, the ‘approve’ and ‘spam’ buttons are right next to each other.)
Chavez is by no means the monster western media seems intent to paint him as, however his reactions to criticism border on the absurd (the recent incidents with Spain and Colombia). He’s a bit of a bulldog, when bulldogging is entirely unnecessary, and perhaps is packing a touch of a persecution complex. I couldn’t say for sure. He’s wearing red all the time too. If he’s so intent on making New Socialism, he should pick a new color. I mean, I like red, but there’s a lot of memories attached to it y’know? A lot of FAILURE in those memories. I think I nice mellow green is much more his style.
In any case, it’s funny that while everyone is freaking out about his referendum, in the midst, Putin is basically taking the quasi democracy that Russia has spent almost 20 years changing into, and slowly, and not so quietly making it back into a centralized democracy (which isn’t actually a democracy, kids.). It’s government for the people, but not by the people. And the scariest bit? The Russians are voting for it. They love the idea. Oh those kooky Rooskies.
Posted on 03-Dec-07 at 9:54 pm | Permalink
Chance wrote:
Tim- Yeah, I agree about Chavez being a kinda paranoid bull-dog. The way that American socialists (or at least me and most of the other socialists I know) see him as someone who has been a good thing for the working class in Venezuela, but also someone to be wary of. We are firm in looking to the working class alone to emancipate themselves–as Marx wrote.
As far as Russia is concerned, yeah, Putin is a choice sirloin d-bag. However, as a good Leninist-Trotskyist, I should note that democratic centralism was misrepresented and distorted (along with everything else!) by Stalin. As a structure for a revolutionary organization or party, it’s really efficient and actually does provide people at the bottom levels with a say in the direction of the party. The higher levels, in my understanding of it, are more of a forum for all the branches to talk about what worked and what didn’t and to set the general direction for the organization. The whole idea is that under socialism the state slowly fades back and only performs the functions that the state ought to be performing (ie taking care of people who can’t work, maintaining infrastructure, etc.).
Posted on 03-Dec-07 at 10:22 pm | Permalink
Patrick wrote:
Tim: United Russia only got 60%, and N.G.O.’s have dismissed the election as being unfair. Morgan listens to the last alternative radio station left in Russia via the internet. He said that Bosses forced their workers to vote, and who you voted for was made known.
Posted on 04-Dec-07 at 1:52 am | Permalink
Timmy wrote:
It’s funny, I have a really love/hate relationship with Papa Josef. I mean, sure the guy basically led more of his own people to neglect and slaughter in the gulag than those naughty Nazies, but he managed to industrialize Russia in less than a generation. That’s not to say that there wern’t costs that came with it. CRAZY costs. But to take an almost entirely agrarian population, and. . . well, you get the picture. It’s really impressive. And depressive, with what then followed. But that’s a bit beside the point.
I’m totally with you on how utterly dead sexy the idealized features of socialism are. Patty can testify. However, I’m sure we’ve both studied enough now to know that quite a few of our main man KM’s ideas (while utterly brilliant and original) are now quite dated, and in are stern need of either revision or outright rejection. The centralized planning of economies has recieved a great many blows to any claims of efficacy (which is not to say it couldn’t be done right, but it’s not looking good). And while it is entirely possible that the working classes will rise up on a country to country basis, the “Revolution” will likely never come on the wide scale we were once promised to believe. In many ways, this is where Bulldog-a-holes like Chavez are a good thing, changing systems in place to help those with the greatest need. However, changing these systems that benefit the rich and impoverish the poor must be done with temperment, as not to break them (the refferendum being a possible warning sign in Chavez’s case). The Northern European example, while frequently quoted, still provides the example of how socialism within a democracy can function. That is not to say a carbon copy of Norway’s healthplan would work in the US of A. Certainly there are many other concerns to be examined and as horrifying as this may sound, the American military serves a very important role in the world (one not being fufilled by our current middle east blunders).
This is getting MUCH longer than i’d anticipated, but in short:
Stalin – Bad, but did what many considered impossible. And committed impossible attrocities in the process.
Putin – Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. (but Russia still loves him)
Chavez- If he wasn’t so sassy, he wouldn’t be so bad.
Socialism – Not as good as it used to be, still, there are bastions of hope.
Posted on 04-Dec-07 at 2:30 am | Permalink