« Blogbat Publicitus: Isobel Coleman on Arab Opportunities | Main | Dispelling Myths: Democrats and War »

January 28, 2007

Venezuela: Canary in the Latin American Mine Shaft?

 

 

An article published at the end of last December in the BBC online edition reports more setbacks for the democratic hopes of the people of Latin American state Venezuela. Late last month President Hugo Chavez ordered that opposition media be silenced in yet another of several moves to consolidate absolute power for himself and for his party. Chavez declared that, “There will be no new operating license for this coupist TV channel – the measure has been drafted so go turn off the equipment.” Since that time the Venezuelan legislative body – all of whose members happen to be members also of the same political party as Chavez – have decided to vote on whether to give Chavez absolute power to make and enforce law and whether Chavez’ term should be extended for life. Both of these of course make for a dangerous cocktail guaranteed to turn Venezuela into a Castro-styled dictatorship, without the benefit of failing health on the part of the dictator.

 

The argument we seem to shockingly hear from those in the Jimmy Carter camp is that all of these officials were elected by their constituents, thus we must give our blessings to their democratic choice to commit national suicide. Aside from the peculiar fact none or very few of these same Americans also think this would be such a swell thing to do here in the US; a double standard which in itself is elitist and ethnocentric, there is also the very real problem with how the elections in Venezuela have been carried out in the first place. To wit, there have been numerous allegations of improper vote counting, so much so that Jimmy Carter was almost the only one left after the last election who seemed to think it all went off without a hitch.  

 

Of course, broken democracies, illiberal democracies, and democracies in name only are fairly pro forma in Latin America. From Brazil’s rocky past of on-again, off-again representative and military governments to the PRI practice in Mexico of joining with dissidents in order to water them down and neutralize them, to the lack of real respect for rule of law, property protection, and  honest record-keeping, it’s easy to see the slouching of Venezuela as simply par for the course. However, what seems to be changing if one looks at some of the more recent polls is that Latin Americans want real democracy. While Venezuela has not been an emerging democracy in the same sense that perhaps Afghanistan, Iraq, or many of the former Soviet satellites are, in Latin American terms, it is one among many others in a time where its people are wondering why corrupt and elitist rulers continue to speak of democracy but deliver repression. In this sense, Chavez is much more similar to the old order than anything new, and it’s doubtful that anyone there doubts it. The fact Chavez is left-leaning simply aggravates life for those outside the region due to that rusty old ideology. As a result he becomes a fast-spreading malignant tumor rather than the garden variety that poses a much slower threat. Despite the Ché-esque promises of change from the Latin American "old guard", the only real difference between Chavez and what he might replace is that Chavez provides a conduit for dangerous springboarding opportunities for China, Cuba, Hezbollah, Iran, and other nefarious states and figures but otherwise offers little difference from right-leaning or other types of controlling regime. In this sense, perhaps Pat Robertson was on to something: if we do not wish to control our borders, then we’d better control the risks to the security of the United States somewhere. And Chavez will seek to do much in our back yard of what Iran is currently doing in the Middle East. At any rate however, he is for the moment merely the woe of his own people and perhaps a few of his cloest neighbors, such as Colombia. While Chavez’ decision to silence opposition in the media is a chilling bit of news, it should come as no shock, nor would it be any surprise to discover the exact extent of the irregularities in the last election, as already touched upon, in which he allegedly won by a sizable margin; the self-same election in which noted self-proclaimed left-leaning human rights activist Jimmy Carter, among others, gave his summary blessing, conveniently refusing to revisit the issue when facts warranted.

 

It is a sad day for the progress of true democracy in Venezuela, and it will probably continue into many sad weeks and months and years. However, I think it helps to underscore a problem that is much deeper: very few states in the region still know, despite politically convenient talk and institutional façades by rulers, what mature democracy, as defined by Fareed Zakaria, and capitalism as defined by economist Hernando de Soto really feels like. Until they can partake in such, they remain easy prey for counterfeiters. Still, it bears repeating it is clear from recent polls taken in Latin America that the people want both democracy and healthy capitalism. Since there is at least that glimmer, Latin America and Venezuela in particular remain as examples of places of possible democratic transition, if only given the chance.

 

 

 

This piece was adapted from an academic work published earlier this month.

 

Posted by Martin at January 28, 2007 01:20 AM

Comments