Venezuela on the economic-political map - a form of national "socialism", nazism

by IIFOR 17.02.2008 - Updated

Venezuela was one of three countries that emerged from the collapse of Gran Colombia in 1830 (the others being Ecuador and New Granada, which became Colombia). For most of the first half of the 20th century, Venezuela was ruled by generally benevolent military strongmen, who promoted the oil industry and allowed for some social reforms. Democratically elected governments have held sway since 1959. Hugo Chavez, president since 1999, seeks to implement his "21st Century Socialism," which purports to alleviate social ills while at the same time attacking globalization. This "socialism" is  in reality a parliamentarian, but still totalitarian, form of national "socialism", nazism, a right fascist system with very significant capitalism and significant statism, despite the marxist propaganda, see below. It is then of course very far from libertarian socialism, anarchism, on the economic-political map, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html .

President Hugo Chavez in 2008 continued efforts to increase the government's control of the economy by nationalizing firms in the cement and steel sectors. In 2007 he nationalized firms in the petroleum, communications, and electricity sectors. In July 2008, Chavez implemented by decree a number of laws that further consolidate and centralize authority over the economy. These measures may reduce the degree of capitalism a bit, but also indicate significant statism.

Current concerns include: a weakening of democratic institutions, political polarization, a politicized military, drug-related violence along the Colombian border, increasing internal drug consumption, overdependence on the petroleum industry with its price fluctuations, and irresponsible mining operations that are endangering the rain forest and indigenous peoples.

With a giniindex about 45 - 50, and moderate inefficient with a GDP per capita at 3 326 US $ (2003), it is more capitalist than the USA with a giniindex at 40.8. and a degree of capitalism at about 75,5%. In the UNDP Human Development Report 2005, the ginindex indicator - which made reference to 1998 - was 49.1 percent. A 2003 estimate was 48.2 and a 2000 estimate was 44.1. However these estimates do probably  not reflect capital income, so the real income inequality may be larger.

The degree of capitalism is estimated to about 78% and the degree of statism to about  57,9%, both significant. The authoritarian degree is thus about 68,7% and the libertarian degree only 31,3%. The system is clearly totalitarian, i.e. with more than 67% authoritarian degree, located in the right fascist sector of the fascist quadrant of the economic-political map,  a form of national "socialism", nazism. Right fascist systems have more than 75% capitalism and 50%-75% statism. Venezuela is ranked as no 80 in the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree, far behind, say, Argentina, ranked as as no 45,  with a point estimate of about 37,8% libertarian degree, and about 62,2% authoritarian degree, i.e. not totalitarian. The national "socialist", nazi, system in Venezuela is however not ultra-fascist, similar to Hitler, Mussolini and Franco's, i.e. with more than 75% statism and 75% capitalism.

Marxist vs anarchist point of view on the situation in Venezuela

by J. Moreno 03.09.2007

For instance, marxists make reference to workers and peasants in struggle, alluding to the imaginative tales that Chavez's propaganda spreads abroad regarding factory and land occupations, something that has happened in only a few instances and under government control, nationalizing bankrupt or seriously troubled agricultural and industrial enterprises, operating them in a regime of state capitalism with no intention of putting them in the hands of the workers. Perhaps such workers and peasants in struggle are what marxists imagine union bureaucrats of UNETE to be, who use their leftist running of the mouth to legitimize the forms of oppression that workers now suffer. It's enough to mention the government's conduct in their own co-managed enterprises, besides the fact that the command structure in the governmental administration is in the hands of soldiers and former soldiers.   On the other hand, marxists present an idyllic version of the self-organization of popular sectors, which would be the result of the Chavez process. The fact is that his regime – with valuable help from the social-democratic and rightist opposition – has been nothing but an obstacle for the advancement of autonomous social organization, by imposing political agendas that have denatured social mobilization to the point of near disappearance. The transformation of Bolivarian circles into purely electoral groups (now named Units of Electoral Struggle) is a clear example. Marxists' key argument is that it is treason to "support the struggle against the Venezuelan state" as that would be "turning your back on ample sectors that are currently self-organizing". It is easy to verify observing the local reality, this self-organization is a huge lie, and the grotesque experience with the remotely controlled organization of cooperatives is enough proof, since what takes place under the guise of the Bolivarian pseudo-revolution is just clients devoutly following the enlightened leader.

Therefore, the only option for anarchists is to promote self-management outside of the institutionalized organization whose slogans, financing and dynamics come from the chief and his associates.   Words like "weakening capitalism" and the "timid advances in socialist culture and economy" sound quite diplomatic and serve to ingratiate you with the heirs of Marxism-Leninism that support Chavez today, but they ignore how efficient government has been in promoting transnational control of key sectors of the local economy, as well as other features that are the absolute opposite of any kind of socialism. Is it "weakening capitalism" to substitute the comprador bourgeoisie of the IV Republic by the "Bolivarian" comprador bourgeoisie? Is it appropriate to showcase as "popular advances" the fact that key indicators of welfare such as health, housing, nutrition, employment, social security, etc. function as badly as they did 10, 20 years ago, under a government that enjoys the biggest oil income of Venezuela 's history? Is it natural of socialism to unconditionally follow the one and only leader and to worship the pedestrian wisdom that emanates from his endless TV appearances? Is it an example of socialist culture the fact that soldiers, active or retired, have taken by assault the control of the state's apparatus, and that from that very same military root the majority of the new comprador bourgeoisie is emerging? Can anybody seriously think that the corrupt elite of followers of the leader that govern Venezuela today are the enlightened vanguard of revolutionary anti-capitalist change?  

We find unacceptable that Chavez's "socialism", all talk and no action, is the excuse used to push the anarchist movement towards joining the chorus of that Marxist left of useful idiots and fellow travelers that deify the Venezuelan military today. It's impossible to understand the country's situation while remaining fixated on the deceitful image they sell us, that of each man for himself but playing a suspicious counterpoint, that of either a Chavez government or its social democrat and rightist opposition. The anarchists of Venzuela have assumed a difficult path, but a path coherent with the anarchist ideal, building a vision and a road to action capable of breaking with the cheating proposals of those who vie for power. Faced with such gangs, we can't choose a chimerical "lesser evil" or an impossible "tactical alliance", since doing so would mean abandoning that which is specific to and non-negotiable in the anarchist ideal. If marxists want to do so, that's their problem … We continue in our struggle, because we have a new world in our hearts and that new world is growing right now.   (Source: CRA)

PS. Monday, Dec. 3, 2007 — Voters in this country narrowly defeated a proposed overhaul to the constitution in a contentious referendum over granting President Hugo Chávez sweeping new powers, the Election Commission announced early Monday. (H.F.)

16.02.2009. Venezuelans have voted to lift limits on terms in office for elected officials, allowing president Hugo Chavez to stand for re-election. With 94% of votes counted, 54% backed an end to term limits, a National Electoral Council official said. Mr Chavez has said he needs to stay in office beyond the end of his current term in 2012 so he can secure what he calls "Venezuela's socialist revolution". Critics say that would concentrate too much power in the presidency.

21.11.2009. Chavez praises terrorist Carlos the Jackal. Hugo Chavez has defended the alleged terrorist mastermind Carlos the Jackal, saying the Venezuelan imprisoned in France was an important "revolutionary fighter" who supported the cause of the Palestinians. The Venezuelan president praised Carlos - whose real name is Ilich Sanchez Ramirez - during a speech Friday night saying: "I defend him. It doesn't matter to me what they say tomorrow in Europe." Ramirez gained international notoriety during the 1970s and 80s as the alleged mastermind of a series of bombings, killings and hostage dramas. He is serving a life sentence in France for the 1975 murders of two French secret agents and an alleged informant. "They accuse him of being a terrorist, but Carlos really was a revolutionary fighter," Chavez said during a televised speech to socialist politicians from various countries, who applauded.

In his speech, Chavez also sought to defend other leaders he said are wrongly labeled "bad guys" internationally, including Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Chavez called both of them brothers and said he now wonders whether Ugandan dictator Idi Amin was truly as brutal as he was reputed to be. "We thought he was a cannibal," Chavez said, referring to Amin, whose regime was notorious for torturing and killing suspected opponents in the 1970s. "I have doubts. ... I don't know, maybe he was a great nationalist, a patriot." Chavez has previously called Ramirez a friend, and a controversy erupted in 1999 after the nazi-leader confirmed he had written a letter to him in prison, in response to a note from Ramirez.

Chavez's remarks on Friday were among his most strident in support of Ramirez. He said he believes Ramirez was unfairly convicted, and called him "one of the great fighters of the Palestine Liberation Organization" at the time. Ramirez was captured in Sudan in 1994, and whisked in a sack to Paris by French agents. He was convicted three years later. He is also accused of having a role in two 1982 bombings - on a Paris-Toulouse train and outside the Paris office of an Arab-language newspaper - and is suspected in two other train bombings on Dec. 31, 1983. Chavez didn't refer to any of the accusations against Ramirez, but suggested the Venezuelan is paying a price for backing the Palestinians' cause - which Chavez also supports.

26.01.2010. Students protest removal of anti-Chavez channel. Thousands of university students protested against President Hugo Chavez again Tuesday, accusing the socialist leader of forcing an opposition-allied TV channel off cable and satellite as a means of silencing his critics. The march by some 3,000 people was peaceful, unlike protests in several cities Monday that escalated into clashes among anti-Chavez factions, the president's supporters and police, leaving two youths dead in a western state. Demonstrators marched on Tuesday from Caracas' central plaza to the headquarters of the leading government-run television channel, where they condemned the removal of Radio Caracas Television Internacional, or RCTV, and accused state media of biased reporting.

"Tell the truth," student leader Roderick Navarro told the channel's representatives. "We don't want this media outlet to continue dividing the people." Government officials argue that RCTV violated recently approved regulations that require two dozen local cable and satellite channels to televise mandatory programming, including Chavez's speeches, whenever the government deems it necessary. The channel, which has been fiercely critical of Chavez for years, did not transmit the president's speech to his supporters over the weekend. RCTV was forced to move to cable in 2007 after Chavez refused to renew its license for regular airwaves, accusing the station of plotting against him and supporting a failed 2002 coup. Five other channels were also dropped from cable, none of which is as widely watched as RCTV.

In a televised address, Chavez said one of them, TV Chile, contacted the telecommunications agency and will probably be permitted to return to cable and satellite. Chavez lashed out at France, criticizing its government for urging Venezuela to reconsider RCTV's removal from cable and satellite TV. The foreign ministry condemned what it called "unacceptable and reprehensible" meddling in Venezuela's affairs and announced that a letter of protest would be presented to the French ambassador in Caracas. For years, Chavez has frequently forced television channels to air his marathon speeches. But the rules had applied only to broadcast TV until last month, when the state-run telecommunications agency expanded them to include local pay-TV stations.

The new regulations have been roundly criticized by Chavez opponents, anarchists, media organizations and others. Jose Miguel Vivanco, Americas director of Human Rights Watch, accused the president of cracking down on independent media that don't share his [national] socialist views. "Chavez has sought to intimidate and punish broadcasters who criticize his government," Vivanco said in a statement. "Now he's also going after those who refuse to promote his own political agenda." On Monday, two youths were killed during skirmishes over an anti-Chavez protest in the western state of Merida. One of the victims was shot and the other was killed by an explosive, Merida Gov. Marcos Diaz said. Police and students also clashed in Caracas, where at least six demonstrators and a journalist suffered minor injuries. The Anarchist International strongly comdemns this attack on free speech, and Chavez' national-socialist - nazi - policy in general.

Workers, farmers, students and young people! Unite in opposition to Chavez' nazi-rule!

An energy crisis in oil-rich Venezuela is putting pressure on President Hugo Chavez and that - with protests over media regulation and falling oil output - is opening the door for a possible political shift, an opposition activist said. "We can win if we present the right candidates, and if we go knowing that this is David against Goliath, because that's what the show for an election in Venezuela is going to be," Leopoldo Lopez, a spokesperson for the opposition said Wednesday 17.02.2010. The opposition hopes to take advantage of the pressure facing Chavez by tapping into key constituencies such as students, community action and labor confederation spokespersons.

A spokesperson for the Anarchist International Libertarian Council for Venezuela, AILCV, says to AIIS: "The anarchists main strategy is direct action, and the anarchists should not create a political party, but in the present situation, within a larger campaign for less authoritarian-degree in Venzuela, the anarchists shold participate in this new opposition movement and give it as much as possible a libertarian approach. The anarchists should also introduce an election boycott action against the most authoritarian parties, and support the most libertarian, in the election in September."

Venezuela is in the midst of an electricity crisis so deep that one of its own government agencies, the National Electric Corporation, warns of a national energy collapse by May if something is not done. As a result, rolling blackouts have been used to conserve energy. During the past several months, Chaves himself has taken to the airwaves, urging Venezuelans to change their incandescent light bulbs to energy-saving bulbs and to save water by taking three-minute baths. The nazi-government also made plans for a possible partial state of emergency. The electrical crisis exposes years of under-investment in infrastructure and is one of the reasons voters could shift towards the opposition. In addition to the electricity crisis, protests over the suspension of an opposition-leaning cable channel and falling oil output also leave questions about the future of and Chavez's 11-year presidency. Criminality including murder, and ochlarchy in general, are on the rise. "The combination of situations opens the door for opposition candidates in the country, even as Chavez throws his considerable weight around," Lopez said.

Meanwhile, the heated protests and counterprotests between Chavez's detractors and supporters can be a problem in itself, Michael Shifter, a spokesperson for the Inter-American Dialogue, said. "Both sides are at each other, and you can't manage an economy, you can't bring a society together if you have that level of confrontation, and that ... I think, is the core failing of Hugo Chavez," he said. Shifter continued, "Chavez is popular because he has an emotional bond with a lot of Venezuelans, and he put his finger on a legitimate grievance in Venezuela, inequality and justice. The problem is, he can't solve the problem. He can't deliver results." "But the anarchists in co-operation with workers, farmers, students and young people in general - united in opposition to Chavez' nazi-rule - and for a libertarian change - can! For a velvet revolution in Venezuela!", the AILCV declares.

---