Chavez win sparks opposition warnings
CARACAS —
Opponents of Venezuela’s leftist President Hugo Chavez Monday warned of greater authoritarian rule after he triumphed in a referendum which could allow him to stay in office for life.
Chavez, who has already been president for a decade in this Latin American nation, said he now intended to stand for a third term in 2012, after winning 54.36% of preliminary results in Sunday’s referendum.
“The doors of the future are wide open,” Chavez boomed from the balcony of his Miraflores palace after winning the referendum which scraps the previous rules requiring the president to stand down after two terms in office.
Chavez’s victory strengthens his mandate, which would normally have ended in 2013, and could prompt him to expand his self-styled socialist revolution, which has led to nationalizations and greater state control over the economy.
In this increasingly polarized country, the opposition garnered 45.63% after more than 11 million people out of some 17 million eligible voters went to the ballot.
The leftist leader is popular with many of the country’s poor for his oil-funded health care and education programs, but blamed by a vocal opposition for rising crime, corruption and inflation.
Critics charge that Chavez has too much power, holding sway over the courts, lawmakers and the election council.
“With this result, the president can deepen the path to socialism and he’ll be tempted to reinforce the authoritarian character of Venezuela’s politics,” warned international relations professor Carlos Romero.
There were also alleged flaws in the weekend ballot.
“Chavez won the right to re-election after a process marred with faults,” the opposition El Nacional newspaper headline read.
The opposition had widely criticized Chavez’s massive state-sponsored campaign for the vote.
“This was the campaign with the most abuses of public resources that we have ever seen,” said opposition member Carlos Vecchio.
The fragmented opposition includes bishops, students and business people but has so far provided no clear alternative to Chavez.
Its leaders are now focusing on elections next year to renew the parliament, which is currently controlled by Chavez supporters.
“We have to analyze what we did well and what we could do much better,” said opposition Caracas mayor Antonio Ledezma.
Venezuela becomes the first Latin American country to adopt unlimited electoral terms with Sunday’s vote.
The president was previously allowed two consecutive terms.
The proposed amendment was Chavez’s second bid to extend presidential term limits after a package of sweeping constitutional changes, including an end to presidential term limits, was struck down by voters in December 2007.
But the vote also comes amid warnings that Chavez’s social programs in this OPEC member nation could be hard hit by tumbling oil prices.
“I think that the greatest challenge the government now faces is governing in the face of crisis and not falling into triumphalism,” said Venezuelan analyst Miguel Tinker Salas of Pomona College, California.
As Chavez-dominated national television stations on Monday played patriotic songs and images, the private opposition-led press lauded the high turnout—the most in the last four elections—and reported complaints about voting machines.
From Buenos Aires to Havana and beyond, many watched the vote on the future of the fierce anti-liberal US foe and Latin American leftist champion, but few reacted to the result.
Chavez said he received his first congratulations from his mentor, former Cuban president Fidel Castro.
The latest vote came only three months after regional and municipal elections in which the opposition gained ground.
“We don’t like Chavez, his people, or unlimited re-election,” said opposition supporter Rosi Gonzales. “He’s destroyed the country.”
Chavez supporters meanwhile reveled in another victory for their larger-than-life leader.
“Chavez has been a president who loves the people and has fought for them,” said Diazmelis Benitez, from a working class neighborhood of Caracas.
Wire reports
Order by Time Order by Popularity
23 Comments
Login to comment
0
yabits
Impossible. How can these opposition figures speak out like this? Don't they know that Chavez is a dictator? Another Hitler in the making?
Elections next year? According to the right wingers here, all bets are off on any elections.
0
SuperLib
Yabits, without any mention of "right wingers" or "neocons" or anything of that nature, what's your personal opinion of Chavez?
0
JoeBigs
We, the United States of American created this man and we failed to keep an eye on him. Bush failed to do anything right about this man and now we are in a worse state in South America because of his administration's mistakes.
I just hope that something can be done to correct that situation. Maybe we can make nice with him and bring him back to our fold. But with all the Bush errors I do not think it will happen.
0
unscrejects
The so-called opposition are the people who for the past three hundred years abused every indigenious and non-European Venezulean. They are in the minority. Have always been and will always be. So how on earth can any sane being ever dream about an election in which they can win? How stupid do the oppressed have to be to vote in the former oppressor? Chavez needs twenty years to fix the system - he steps down and those looters get right back in to loot Venezuela dry (like they were doing until Chavez came). Latin America makes apartheid SA a good role model of human relations.
0
adaydream
I think that the people of Venezuela know what they want. They are the ones living there and the ones who see how he runs the country.
Looks like the people of Venezuela know what they want. < :-)
0
SuperLib
Knowing what you want and being able to express that are two different things. If you're involved in the government in any way, whether it be a legislator or someone in the military who takes orders, your support for Chavez isn't an option. It's a requirement.
If people were allowed to make choices freely it would be interesting to see what the final numbers would be. My guess is that Chavez would lose.
0
yabits
Chavez is a man with a vision for his country and, as the case with many with vision, has a very large ego to go along with it. To those outside the area, he is a radical in this sense: He believes that the great wealth of Venezuela (which currently means its vast oil reserves) is a commonwealth belonging to all of Venezuela's people and not just an elite few. He genuinely wants to improve the lot of the millions of Venezualans in poverty, and does not believe that a free market will do it.
A significant majority of the Venezuelan people want a strong leader who will stand up to the USA and global institutions like the World Bank and IMF. That they should want for such a leader speaks to how forces outside of Venezuela have attempted to manipulate events and conditions within the country. To understand the appeal of Chavez, one must understand how Simon Bolivar is regarded, since that is where Chavez's philosophy has its root. (In addition to Christian liberation theology.)
One must also understand the impact of the globalization effort known as the Washington Consensus on Latin America. The rise of leaders like Chavez, Lula (Brazil), and Morales (Bolivia) can be seen as a direct response by millions of people to the economic prescriptions of the Consensus. Now that the once-mighty Uncle Sam is the biggest debtor with its own economy in shambles, it seems prescient for nations like Venezuela not to have gotten onboard.
0
yabits
Your problem is that you have absolutely no factual basis whatsoever to imply that people in Venezuela are not allowed to make a free choice at the ballot box. Every international organization that has monitored elections in Venezuela has found them to be free and fair. Moreover, there is no one that I have ever read from the Venezuelans opposed to Chavez who believe they currently have an electoral majority in any way, shape or form. They all seem to acknowledge that building towards such a majority might be possible, but not for quite awhile.
The direct evidence that a significant majority of Venezuelans support what Chavez is doing is something that a lot of Americans can't accept.
0
adaydream
SuperLib
That's B/S. This was a free and fair election. Nobody looked over shoulders to see who you voted for. You're really stretching it.
Talk about how Chavez sounds to the outside world; how did george bush sound to the outside world. I mean we knew he was full of crap, a big blowhard that had the military at his hand and made a fool of himself. Chavez hasn't attacked anybody, he is a blowhard. Doesn't sound so dangerous compared to what we've had. < :-)
0
yabits
To Latin American nations like Venezuela, the United States often comes across as the big bully on the block, the one with the massive insecurity complex and with more muscles than brains. We'll point at Cuba and warn other countries: "If you want to be my friend you stay away from that kid." Spanish-speaking countries that is, as Canada seems to get along with Cuba just fine.
0
SuperLib
People from all over the world criticize Chavez. Even ordinary Venezuelans. Your focus on the United States is misplaced.
Why would I do that? The topic is Chavez. It's not a comparison of Bush and Chavez, and quite frankly it's absurd that you'd think it is.
Shall I step aside while you and daydream stroke each others obsession?
Sure. If you talk about the mechanical process of voting. But once you look at Chavez's comments about sending tanks into the streets, murdered journalists, his control of all areas of the government, all military promotions, immigration, etc...well...let's just say that people more often give him the benefit of the doubt when they walk into that booth to "freely" make their decision...
I'm sorry boys, but your obsession with Bush has made you create absurd positions defending anyone who criticizes him. You can't even respond to an argument about Chavez without trying to change it to Bush which makes little to no sense in a rational mind. You want his anti-Bush words to be credible so you'll help prop up his credibility to appease your obsession which most people would agree is out of control at this point. Bush has you guys by the balls....and from the looks of it you cannot escape.
0
yabits
Let the record show that I never mentioned Bush in regards to this topic.
LOL!! The United States is the 800-pound gorilla in the Latin American "space." Any commentary on Latin American conditions which pretends that the US isn't there can only be described as ludicrous at best.
Gee, if things keep going like this, Venezuela will be as bad as Columbia or Paraguay. But somehow, these self-righteous Americans clucking their tongues at Chavez don't seem to notice or care. Could it the oil? Or is it just that Americans hate free speech when it is directed against them, and Chavez has provided long string of well-founded critiques of US policy in the region.
0
adaydream
Unless someone has some report to refute this I believe that the citizens of Venezuela are more accepting to Chavez and trust him much more than the citizens trusted bush.
I hear posters talking about how bad Chavez is and how badly the people are treated; we don't live there, we just listen to disgruntled people. But when we look at a free and legal election and the people make a choise, hey guys the Venezuelan's are the ones that voted for this. < :-)
0
yabits
adaydream: Since this thread provides solid evidence that those who are opposed to Chavez within Venezuela are not afraid to speak out about it, it makes a very strong case that Chavez's popularity, which has been between 60-70% is pretty accurate.
The opposition admits that they are years away from developing any kind of majority, unless economic conditions in the country really take a dive, or Chavez can be shown to be someone as corrupt as his predecessors. Which he has not been. He can certainly be buffoonish, but it appears that he is genuinely motivated to not have Venezuela fall back into the the kind of massive corruption vis-a-vis oil wealth that his predecessors enjoyed via a cozy relationship with the largest customer of that oil.
The standard imposed by US-based critics of Chavez is this: If you're going to criticize the US openly, and develop relationships with countries the US doesn't want you to, you have to be a saint in all respects. Any human flaw will be amplified and used against you.
Venezuela, despite its oil wealth and democracy, was a country with extremely serious problems prior to Chavez -- problems that Chavez inherited. He was a guy who looked out and said, "Hey, things don't have to be like this." If what Chavez does is able to lift the majority of the Venezuelan people to a better condition, his anti-Americanism does not bother me in the least. Much of it is richly deserved. If the US wanted to be a good neighbor, it should be trying to figure out ways to help, or at least not to interfere in the experiment that is the Fifth Republic Movement.
0
SuperLib
Mostly people talk about how Chavez has helped the poor but done so in a way that consolidates too much power into the hands of one man. They often talk about how that's a dangerous position for Venezuelans to put themselves in and how Chavez essentially buys votes or puts himself in a position to limit someone's livelihood which naturally brings about obedience.
Yet you look at his domestic policies and speak of how his anti-Americanism doesn't bother you which is a really weird link to make, in my opinion. You tend to bridge issues in an illogical nature, probably because your desire to talk about the US forces you to have that be the end to any statement you make regardless of where the statement begins. In the end you worship the man by default because of what he does for your obsession with America.
0
yabits
The truth is that you are obsessed with how people post comments, to the extent that you avoid discussing the topic directly, and then simply launch little insults or apply cheap pop-psychology.
"Mostly people talk..." What people? "They often talk...." Who are "they?"
0
SuperLib
Well in case you missed it I asked what your person opinion of Chavez was, plus a couple of other posts talking about criticism of him. To date you've brushed aside all criticism and used your remaining time talking about the US.
To some extent you are correct, tho. I am a bit fascinated by people such as yourself. I'm curious as to how a radical's mind becomes so rock hard, and what they do to justify it to themselves. For some people it's political...they have to play the game and they want to win at all costs. You seem to actually live in a different world so it's more interesting to me.
0
yabits
First of all, start with getting tired of being lied to and swallowing those lies. Then maybe you'll stop parroting the lies about leaders like Chavez, whom a majority of Venezuelans currently don't have much of a problem with.
If you were to adopt a strict adherence to seeking truth, you too would soon be seen as a radical and "living in a different world" by those whose approach to truth is much more "flexible."
0
Sarge
yabits: "He genuinely wants to inprove the lot of the millions of Venezuelans in poverty..."
With all that oil wealth, there are millions of poor Venezuelans?! Must be a socialist government there screwing things up!
"... and does not believe that a free market will do it."
That's where he's wrong.
0
yabits
I should clarify that by "free market," I am referring to the stipulations foisted on Latin America by the IMF and World Bank, one of which called for unrestricted (i.e. "free") capital flows. The nations that adopted that principle: Thailand, Argentina, Venezuela, etc., have all experienced severe economic crises and greater poverty. The nations that put restrictions on capital flow, most notably India and China, have done much better.
Before Chavez took office in 1998, the poverty rate in Venezuela was over 60%. There was no "socialist government screwing things up," and yet Venezuela sits on the largest reserves of oil in the world -- estimated to exceed Saudi Arabia's by several times.
The most recent numbers show the poverty rate at just below 40%, which represents millions of Venezuelans lifted out of poverty over the past 10 years. The great problem with the free market is, as with Santa Claus, there aren't enough people gullible enough to believe such a thing exists other than in Fantasyland. We've seen plenty of recent examples of people who touted the free market running for a government handout when things got a little tough.
0
SuperLib
...any criticism of Chavez?
0
yabits
Because I am an American who often has to deal with many other Americans whose intellectual integrity is not very high, offering a criticism of Chavez would likely be misconstrued as justifying the grossly wrong-headed response to his regime that the previous US administration took.
In other words, once the United States removes the beam from its own eye, we'll be in a better position to comment on the speck in Chavez's.
0
SuperLib
So you and I can't talk about criticism of Chavez until the beam gets removed from the US's eye?
Back to top