Chavez Venezuela Quotes

In Venezuela Chavez has made the co-ops a top political priority, giving them first refusal on government contracts and offering them economic incentives to trade with one another. By 2006, there were roughly 100,000 co-operatives in the country, employing more than 700,000 workers. Many are pieces of state infrastructure – toll booths, highway maintenance, health clinics – handed over to the communities to run. It’s a reverse of the logic of government outsourcing – rather than auctioning off pieces of the state to large corporations and losing democratic control, the people who use the resources are given the power to manage them, creating, at least in theory, both jobs and more responsive public services. Chavez’s many critics have derided these initiatives as handouts and unfair subsidies, of course. Yet in an era when Halliburton treats the U.S. government as its personal ATM for six years, withdraws upward of $20 billion in Iraq contracts alone, refuses to hire local workers either on the Gulf coast or in Iraq, then expresses its gratitude to U.S. taxpayers by moving its corporate headquarters to Dubai (with all the attendant tax and legal benefits), Chavez’s direct subsidies to regular people look significantly less radical.

I can see why people find him [Hugo Chávez] charming. He's very ebullient, as they say. I've heard him make a speech, though, and he has a vice that's always very well worth noticing because it's always a bad sign: he doesn't know when to sit down. He's worse than Castro was. He won't shut up. Then he told me that he didn't think the United States landed on the moon and didn't believe in the existence of Osama bin Laden. He thought all of this was all a put-up job. He's a wacko.

Hoy se reconoce casi universalmente que el marxismo fue un experimento que fracasó, al menos en sus aplicaciones mundanas. Los países que lo adoptaron se derrumbaron, lo abandonaron o languidecieron en unas dictaduras retrógradas.

Some version of this story has repeated itself throughout the world over the last century. A cast of political outsiders, including Adolf Hitler, Getulio Vargas in Brazil, Alberto Fujimori in Peru, and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, came to power on the same path: from the inside, via elections or alliances with powerful political figures. In each instance, elites believed the invitation to power would contain the outsider, leading to a restoration of control by mainstream politicians. But their plans backfired. A lethal mix of ambition, fear, and miscalculation conspired to lead them to the same fateful mistake: willingly handing over the keys of power to an autocrat-in-the-making. … If a charismatic outsider emerges on the scene, gaining popularity as he challenges the old order, it is tempting for establishment politicians who feel their control is unraveling to try to co-opt him. … And then, establishment politicians hope, the insurgent can be redirected to support their own program. This sort of devil’s bargain often mutates to the benefit of the insurgent …

The coup that overthrew President Chavez of Venezuela in April 2002 was greeted with euphoria in Washington. The new president—a businessman—was instantly recognized and the hope expressed that stability and order would return to the country, thus creating the basis for solid future development. The New York Times editorialized in identical language. ... The coup was reversed three days later and Chavez then came back to power. The State Department soberly denied any prior knowledge about anything, saying it was all an internal matter. It was to be hoped that a peaceful, democratic, and constitutional solution to the difficulties would be arrived at, they said. The New York Times editorial followed suit, merely adding that perhaps it was not a good idea to embrace the overthrow of a democratically elected regime, however obnoxious, too readily if one of America's fundamental values was support for democracy.

In 1522, the country now known as Venezuela was colonized by Spain. Venezuela declared independence from Colombia In 1830. During the 19th and most of the 20th centuries Venezuela was ruled by caudillos or military strongmen. In the 1950’s, Venezuela became a good example of a Latin American Country, ruled by a benevolent dictator on the very far right. This automatically made Venezuela our ally and thus received huge grants from us. President Marcos Pérez Jiménez was awarded the Legion of Merit by Dwight D. Eisenhower. In return for this, he allowed American corporations to flourish in his country. Of course, he was also always ready to accept personal contributions. Since 1958, the country has had a series of democratic governments. It’s economy depended on the export of coffee and cocoa until oil was discovered early in the 20th century. It now has the world's largest known oil reserves and is one of the world's leading exporters of oil. The people lost confidence in the existing parties since the government favored the large corporations over their needs. This led to Hugo Chávez being elected president in 1998, In 1999 the Constituent Assembly wrote a new Constitution of Venezuela. Chávez also initiated programs aimed at helping the poor. In 2013. After the death of Chavez, Nicolás Maduro his vice president was elected. Problems ensued causing an economic recession. Inflation also became the worst in the country's history, leading to hunger, crime and corruption. Protests starting in 2014 became prevalent and continue until now, leaving many of the protesters maimed or dead.

Blatant dictatorships - in the form of fascism, communism, or military rule - has disappeared across much of the world. Military coups and other violent seizures of power are rare. Most countries hold regular elections. Democracies still die, but by different means. Since the end of the Cold War, most democratic breakdowns have been caused not by generals and soldiers but by elected governments themselves. Like Chavez in Venezuela, elected leaders have subverted democratic institutions in Georgia, Hungary, Nicaragua, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and Ukraine. Democratic backsliding today begins at the ballot box.

Left-wing populism made a strong showing primarily in parts of Latin America in the 1990s and 2000s, with the rise of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Brazil, and the Kirchners in Argentina. But this wave has already retreated, with the self-immolation of Venezuela under Chavez’s successor, Nicolás Maduro. The strong showings of Jeremy Corbyn in the United Kingdom and Bernie Sanders in the United States may be harbingers of a recovery, but parties of the left are nowhere the dominant forces they were through the late twentieth century.

Deliberation is made possible by our evolved reasoning capacities, and this explains why, as historians and political scientists have along observed, free and open deliberation generally leads to choices superior to those of autocratic and technocratic systems.

Chavez and later Maduro instituted widespread price controls that José Niño describes as the “main culprit in Venezuela’s economic tragedy.

Some socialists might object and say that freedom of speech is possible in a socialist model and that many modern socialist parties and groups in the West adamantly support free speech. That’s true, but so did the Soviets. And so did Hugo Chavez and the other socialists in Venezuela—before he started confiscating the nation’s radio stations to spew propaganda. Socialists always promise that they will protect individual rights, but, as the Soviet Constitution makes clear, not if those rights get in the way of some other, supposedly more important societal goal.

When Venezuela was a freer economy, it was relatively prosperous. But as the government became more involved in regulating the economy, it became progressively less free, less efficient, and less productive. When Chavez came to power, this process was already well underway; he only doubled down on it and turned economic regression into economic disaster.” -p. 22

According to Transparency International's 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index, Chavez's Bolivarian revolution created a country that ranked 164th out of the 178 nations surveyed -placing Venezuela below Haiti in perceptions of corruption. Unfairness in the Venezuelan public sector was at the level of Congo, Guinea, and Kyrgyzstan. Unfairness, of course, is the precise opposite of equality.