Obama already began his anti-Venezuela rhetoric during his campaign. I think we can expect nothing else than to see the whack Prince of Hope step it up once he takes office. With Chavez’ recent alignment with Russia, and the Siberian military’s presence off the Venezuelan coast for detailed exercises, another attempted coup wouldn’t be a surprise. Washington will continue to finance the CIA/Venezuelan elite led opposition, maybe somehow upping the ante. With their bitch Uribe right next door, an inevitable overthrow strategy has to already be on the drawing board. Maybe he’ll even persuade Colombia to confront Venezuela in one way or another. A false-front attack on Colombia from Venezuela would be one way to stir up trouble without direct involvement.

The media, however, has been conducting their hate campaign against Chavez practically since his taking office. The past victorious PSUV elections of 2008 resulted in CNN reporting Chavez as a dictator, again, which based on election participation and results, is not the case. How long then, the question might be more appropriately phrased, until Obama pledges full allegiance to his star-spangled media machine? I give him 90 days, max.

Washington must be prudent though in their approach, Chavez has amassed many allies in the region and abroad, he’s moving toward an untouchable status that would be delicate to confront.

As for the troops, they’re already right next door in Colombia, a step-up would be a piece of cake. Time will tell.

Best to you.

forming a cult is not of interest, continuing to see improvement in Venezuelan society is. Little by little Chavez has accomplished more in the past decade than in the previous 4 decades under the oligarchy — whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

I won’t waste my time trying to argue our differences in opinion of what has happened in Venezuela since Chavez came to power, but the election statistics speak for themselves. The oligarchy’s entrenched position in society is obviously going to take time to combat, which is why the majority of opposition in Venezuela are the elite.

If you mistakenly understood that I want Chavez to succeed for his own personal interest or gain, and not the success of Venezuelan society, you obviously only skimmed my comment, at best. Thanks.

Best to you.

I care not one whit about Chavez. I do care about socialism, as does Petras. If you want to form a cult of Chavez, go right ahead. Your comments reveal a lack of understanding about socialism and about events in Venezuela. People there are becoming impatient with government officials who ignore their complaints, with the continuing astronomical crime rate, with poor garbage collection, with the oligarchy which continues to amass huge fortunes. Chavez’s “socialism for the 21st century is stalling and people, who have been his supporters, have been increasingly staying home on election day. I fervently hope that he succeeds, not for himself, but for constructing a socialist society so that the people of Venezuela can succeed.

thanks, and I concur with your amendment.

Out of curiosity, if one abstained from participating in the farce (voting) because of the inherent fallacies in the US electoral democracy system, are comments still welcome?

If the black/white Prince of Hope can deliver even a fraction of Chavez’ success, he might be something to write about…someday.

Best to you.

And if you voted for Obama, you have no right to share in Petras’s comments on the democratic reforms still yet to be taken up in Venezuela; because your comments are clearly imperialist, hypocritical trash.

if you had a better understanding of Chavez’ background growing up as an impoverished, young Venezuelan of two modest school teachers, I doubt you’d accuse him of possibly going along for a ride. He’s been committed to this idea of a Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement since the 80’s when he invented it, even prior to his failed coup attempt of 1992 which got him arrested and which also brought him the attention needed to captivate his new supporters. He is a strategist at heart, with the goal of bringing his people dignity, as he himself asserts and demonstrates.

While he may not be perfect; flamboyantly inappropriate with remarks at times — it’s apparent that the majority of Venezuelans concur with his approach to real change that has been felt through the progress thus far made; falling poverty, access to health services, education/training programs, land appropriation (which the wealthy really hate), micro-loans, etc. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and turning around the social effects of US-endorsed corruption of 40 years will take time.

Best to you.

thanks for bringing L. America back into the spectrum of debate. With all the Gaza focus, which is understandable, DV has been flooding us with the topic.

Your first comparison with Colombia — ah, home sweet home — justifies the importance of “(3) competing ideas and freedom to act without physical or psychological coercion.”

While this beautiful, conflict-enduring nation may indeed have free elections, competing ideologies are not tolerated by any means. Although the political landscape does provide habitat for many political parties, any real momentum made by what would be considered opposition to the oligarchy has always been oppressed. This accusation was firmly indicated with the assassination of Jorge Eliecer Gaitan in 1948 — ironically while US Secretary of State George C. Marshall was in Bogota to promote the OAS.

The most recent and stellar example violating (3), was the elimination of the UP Party of the early 80s established by the FARC, who were actually fervent Gaitanistas that organized an armed movement against the state since their representative had just been eliminated to carry out social changes through legal, political means. Within a few years (by mid 80s) more than 500 political members had been assassinated, obviously not by the guerrilla group(s) but by the military/paramilitary. By the turn of the century the party had been completely dissolved. Democracy in Colombia? Yeah, right, to the smallest extent possible. When do Colombians get to vote for TLC? That would be a strong tilt in the direction of democracy.

The transition from oligarchic electoral politics to democracy is key for the public to understand that which is has been taking shape in Venezuela. Under the Punto Fijo Pact of 1958, which included a third party at signing — Democratic Republican Union, Venezuelan’s choice for leadership was as limited as in the US. No wonder the US was such a strong supporter of Venezuela’s elite rulers for so many years. Chavez overturned all that.

His brilliant criticism of the elite’s failures reflected in the economic crisis of the 90’s and increasing poverty brought about that which Washington abhors so much — participatory democracy. We’re not talking about the farcical electoral democracy system in the US. So, when Colin Powell stated in 2002 that Chavez doesn’t understand what democracy means, what he really meant to say was that Chavez doesn’t understand Washington’s interpretation of what democracy means.

If you’re gonna rob a country blind, it can’t be accomplished with participatory democracy; hence Washington’s disdain for Chavez since he threw a tractor-trailer lug wrench into their system of 40-year, elite hegemony and exposing their illusion. Ah, what a pity.

This past decade has been the most active one for non-elite Venezuelans. Voter turnout and electoral participation climbed to 65% in the past election where Chavez’ PSUV party was victorious — an indication that apathy has been transformed into action. In contrast, Colombia’s last major election in 2006 resulted in less than 45% as the population grows more apathetic and distrusting of the system. If the Venezuelan people — especially the poor who make up the majority of the population and Chavez supporters — want to continue electing the same leader to direct their Bolivarian Revolution, then let them continue to carry out their internationally monitored, free and fair elections to their hearts’ content. Venezuela has experienced a beneficial turn around for the poor under Chavez — f**k the elite opposition if they don’t like it.

Michael Kenny is most correct — let Venezuelans decide for themselves, it’s their country and their government now, outside opinion is irrelevant.

Soy chavista de corazón y digo yo, ¡Qué vivan los pueblos libre y soberanos!

Thanks, Doc.

Best to all.

However I am very concerned about the lack of progress in Venezuela during the past several years in relation to two key points made by Petras:

“To consummate and complete the process of democratization requires the equalization of socio-economic conditions in society and the introduction of democratic reforms in the state and within publicly owned enterprises.

“The full realization of democracy requires the implementation of a socialist transformation in which elections take place in the work place and through a program of re-distribution of wealth, land and financial resources.”

It is a very real possibility that a social democratic bureaucracy may consolidate its power and Chavez may find it easy to just go along for the comfortable ride. This would not be so bad except that the capitalist grounded oligarchy is very powerful and can easily restore itself to power if the revolutionary aspirations of the people continue to go unmet.