Why am I glad the NO won in Venezuela? (Chávez)

1) Personally, I've never been very fond of Chávez because of his military past, and his authoritarian streak (I have to add that most Venezuelans think that he's kind of authoritarian, but yet most support him... I just don't like authoritarians). However, he's done GREAT things for the poor people in Venezuela (over 70% of the population). He's given them health care, education, and wage increases that none other President has ever done.
However, he got drunk on power... he thought he could do and say anything and no one would say NO. He thought he could run again forever, and no other candidates would oppose him... well, personally I think that one of the most important things of a democracy is renovation... you just can't stick with someone for so many years and pretend that everything will be ok. Not Thatcher, not Blair, not Chirac, not Mitterrand, not anyone... you NEED renovation in politics and in a democracy, you need new blood and new ideas. Chávez's plan to run for reelection forever didn't make much sense to me... I'm sure there are lots of men and women among Chávez's allies who are more than capable to lead not only his party and Venezuela, but the whole Bolivarian revolution. He hasn't done this single handedly, although it is clear that he is the most prominent leader.

2) Chávez haters can now stop saying he's a dictator. They can now stop saying elections are unfair and that he's a Castro wannabe. Chávez LOST this election fair and square, just as he won the last seven elections, and he accepted the result like a gentleman. Venezuela is MORE than a democratic country... they have democratic tools (thanks to Chávez!) that no other country has. Chávez has proven, today and the last few years, that he's a real democrat, and that he really respects the will of the people. Authoritarian? Sure... but he's still a democrat, and that is something to RESPECT and to ADMIRE.

3) I, as a Latin American, can say people love strong leaders. Personally I think it is time to break from the old "caudillos" EVERYWHERE. Venezuela, is just one country where this has happened recently, but that's not the only case. My own country, Costa Rica, narrowly elected Washington's chosen leader (in a very very very close election though) 2 years ago, and us on the left of center were really disappointed. Just recently, he was able to get CAFTA approved in a referendum where the Bush administration heavily interfered... Latin American leaders tend to think that they can do ANYTHING and no one will tell them not to, that's the case of Chávez, of Uribe in Colombia, of Arias in Costa Rica, etc. It always feels great when the PEOPLE tell them not to.




Chávez still has 5 years in power. I hope he continues with his great social policies, where he has made university education open to everyone, where he has made health care universal and has given the indigenous people the rights they have deserved for CENTURIES. He has made oil profits benefit the people who needed it the most, the ones who most deserved it.
But as I said, he also got drunk on power, and I hope this lose allows him to get in touch with reality. In politics, you have to negotiate... yes, even with those who despise you and want to kill you. That's the way democracy works, and if you want to be consistent you have to work within this frame.

Now, I'm very optimistic on the future of Venezuela! Chávez will remain as President for the next 5 years, but hopefully he will learn to negotiate and stay put sometimes... it is just not worth to risk the whole Bolivarian revolution on a few things.


And to end... I have to admire his concession speech. He proved he is really a statesman, that he is humble, and that his ultimate interest is the good being of his people.

Latin American leaders tend to think that they can do ANYTHING and no one will tell them not to, that's the case of Chávez, of Uribe in Colombia, of Arias in Costa Rica, etc. It always feels great when the PEOPLE tell them not to.

-
then he would have forced these changes with a Mushie like coup and not go to the people via a referendum.

They think people support them no matter what. That was the case with with Uribe in his reelections referendum a few years ago (that he won), and Arias with his CAFTA referendum (that he won too).

2007 is not a time to force any changes, in Latim America authoritarian leaders nowadays would rather paint it with the most democratic brush that they can.

Chavez is one'a them so-ci-al-ists. That means he's a dic-ta-tor. We need to overthrow him, 'cause ya just can't trust tyrants like him to honor the will of the people. Not like our good buddy Pootie-Poot...ya can see from the 'lection results how much his people love him.

:sarcasm:

I'm Latin American... I fully sympathize with most of Chávez policies... I don't agree with everything though, and I think one of the worst parts was his idea of repealing term limits. Latin America NEEDS term limits, because we somehow tend to elect over and over and over again people who not necessarily are the best for the needs of the moment. We've had both right wing and left wing caudillos... why can't be allow a natural renovation of our different democratic parties? Why can't we allow new people to get to power?

Perú reelected a former President from the 80s... same thing in my country Costa Rica... same thing in Nicaragua. Damn! Are we stuck in the 80s?? Can't we find someone else new, with new blood and new ideas for the country? Same thing for Chávez, in my opinion... 10 years is more than enough, especially in Latin America.

n/t.

This may be the best result for everyone, all things considered.

The referendum tried to do too much, perhaps. Chavez offered something like 33 changes and by the time the Assembly finished with it, there were twice as many.

I'm disappointed, arcos, but at least now the vultures have no excuse. :)

Yes, he probably avoided a coup... and that's NOT a good thing (not the fact that he avoided it, but the fact that it means a coup was imminent!).

Yes, I also agree he probably tried to do too much... I believe that if the terms limits stuff wasn't included, he probably would have won, and won big. That was probably the main issue that drove people to vote no. Hopefully he will be able to get into law a good chunk of the social agenda that the referendum included.

We'll see what happens, but I'm really optimistic. I didn't expect anything else of him, but I had a slight fear he might no react well to a lose... and well, he's a gentleman. As you say, the vultures have no excuse now.

:hi:

I haven't seen anything about it in the usual places.

posted from another thread ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3087211
post 155

155. I think maybe Chavez just disarmed them for a while, ...
Edited on Mon Dec-03-07 01:30 PM by CRH

And, I mean just for a while. With Mexico oil at peak and excess reserves no longer available for North American consumption after 2013, it is also hard for me to believe either of the political parties or the CIA, will not try to acquire more privatization profits and control of dispersal of the next closest significant reserves. Behind the scenes, they will claim the interests of national security and keeping the global industrial resource available without socialist or dictatorial restraints, lends sufficient reason to whatever ventures of subversion they pursue. They pretty much have worn out the democracy and dictator excuses, and it will be difficult to sell the terrorists excuse. It will be more difficult to mask their resource controlling schemes any other way. Heaven forbid they would simply pay a just and reasonable price in a fair market, without being able to control the rate of flow and dispersal, as well. So, just what their next pretext is to be, has me wondering too.

The knee jerk press responses of the democratic party elite in the past, i.e., Kerry following the socialist dictator meme, and Pelosi with her 'thug' comments; indicates the democrats in power, are no better friends to Venezuela and the present political structure, than that of their further right wing imperialist republican cousins.

On the surface without a lot of thinking, I have wondered about the posts above of the three exit polls predicting a 'YES' victory. Two of the polling firms in past elections have been opposition oriented and way off base. I can't speak to the third. And no one has questioned the accuracy of the exit polls, Chavez and the 'NO' vote included. I am not questioning the integrity of the vote or its acceptance, but rather wondering if the exit polls were a form of bait to tempt a challenge or recount, and possibly provoke a civil confrontation that would give pretext to foreign intervention. All of this is just my active mind trying to figure out the non response to the unanimous exit polls, and whether it is a shrewd non response by Chavez to a baited situation.

Oh well, enough supposition.

edit: for word order and clarity

has an inordinate number of posts that add absolutely nothing to the debate - let me be the first in this thread to own that dubious title with this un-pithy:

:toast:
:toast:
:toast:

to this thread, not so much because I agree or disagree but because it is actually worth taking the time to read

post that actually adds something to the Chavez threads. I too am glad the referendum lost. Trying to push through so much was a dubious idea, and I didn't like the move toward a greater concentration of power in the executive branch. That said, the "dictator" meme was always a silly one and Chavez acceptance of the vote with such a narrow margin, and conciliatory words, demonstrate why.

:hi:

:silly:

He has nobody to blame but himself.

I'm Latin American. A left winger Latin American. As I said, I've never been a Chávez fan, but I don't like the opposition AT ALL.

The CIA propaganda says Chávez is a communist, a dictator. I don't think he's either... Chávez really has the well being of the people first, but that doesn't mean everything he proposes is actually right (at least in my very humble opinion, since I don't pretent to be the owner of the truth... I fully respect those who don't agree with me.)

This is no CIA propaganda... I believe in a break from the "Washington consensus", but I don't think ALL of the proposed Chávez reform was the best way to reach this. To be specific, I didn't agree with his plan to remove term limits. As I said, this has happened before all around the continent, and I have to be consistent... I was against term limits being repealed in my country (Costa Rica) to allow Oscar Arias to run again, I was opposed when they were repealed in Colombia to allow Uribe to run again, and I didn't think it was a good idea in Venezuela either.

And, I don't mean in the contentious way that Baduel came out. That wasn't helpful. But it would be good to hear that there's more than Chavez between Venezuela and Exxon.

I don't know what propaganda you need to see that. His actions make it very obvious.

Americans have a very pressing need to look to the beam in their own eye

:hide:

as well as presenting his message and accomplishments fairly.

Being 'drunk with power' is within the realm of argument, but I just can't speak to any past actions that suggest any abuse of power, and so that part for me personally, is undecided.

However, it is his fiery sometimes authoritarian manner, in juxta position to his being a democrat and something to 'respect and admire', along with his ultimate humble statesmanship placing the well being of the people first, that is a delicious delight of contradiction in his perceived character.

Good post and Thank You.

Other comments in another thread ~~ http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3087211 ~~ post 141

I think the vote is a very positive sign. The people of Venezuela are leading, not just one person. That's as it should be.

And he graciously accepted the people's vote -- which is also as it should be.

tuanis :D :hug:

It is a good thing.

K&R

First, to complement the poster who composed this OP on their very reasoned, sensible post. I agree with you with the exception of what happens with no term limits, it doesn't mean that much, imo, (Canadian whose government has no term limits and it's not a problem) but it DOES put the onus upon the voters/citizens to participate in choosing the leaders they believe will be responsive to their needs. Term limits doesn't guarantee change, because the face of one is gone doesn't mean the next face will be ANY different in terms of policies, good or bad.

I don't think he was drunk with power but I do think he tried to do too much in the referendum, it might have been better to have put forward some of the issues in this referendum and, if they passed, put them into practice in helping the people of Venezuela. The issue of term limits could have been left for a later referendum if it was still needed.


The second reason I want to kick this is because it is one of the few reasoned, thoughtful threads on the issue of Chavez and Venezuela.

Thanks for your work on this, it is much appreciated.