Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Judi Lynn

(160,601 posts)
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:30 PM Jan 2013

Continuity Likely Even Without Chávez

Continuity Likely Even Without Chávez

Mark Weisbrot is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. He is also president of Just Foreign Policy.

Updated January 4, 2013, 1:00 PM

Since Hugo Chávez first took office, he and his party have won 13 of 14 national elections, mainly because they greatly improved the living standards of the majority of voters in Venezuela. Since 2004, after the economy recovered from the devastating opposition oil strike, poverty has been cut by half and extreme poverty by more than 70 percent.

And this measures only cash income: millions of people also got access to health care for the first time, and access to education also increased sharply, with college enrollment doubling and free tuition for many. Eligibility for public pensions tripled; and in the past two years the government has built hundreds of thousands of houses. Most of the poverty reduction came from increased employment, not “government handouts,” and during most of Chávez’s tenure the private sector has grown faster than the public sector. These numbers are not really in dispute among economists or international statistical agencies. If you follow Venezuela and haven’t heard any of this, it’s because the news media is giving you the equivalent of a “tea party” view of the country.

Also, the 20 years prior to Chávez were an economic disaster, with per capita income actually falling between 1980 and 1998. So naturally most people have noticed the difference. Is this progress sustainable? The press focuses on Venezuela’s inflation, which, at just under 18 percent is about the highest in the region. However it has come down from 28.2 percent in 2010, even as the economy has recovered and growth has accelerated. This shows that the government can bring inflation down with the right policies. Chávez’s party won in 20 of 23 states during a regional election on Dec. 16, even with Chávez himself absent from the campaign trail. This indicates that his successor will likely win if he should step down.

This should not be surprising. All of the left-leaning governments in South America -- Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia and Uruguay -- have been re-elected, some repeatedly, for similar reasons: they have brought real economic and social change and significant improvements in living standards for the majority.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/03/venezuela-post-chavez/venezuelans-will-vote-with-their-wallets

(No more to this article at link.)

15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Bacchus4.0

(6,837 posts)
1. Huge Venezuela housing shortage an election worry
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:05 PM
Jan 2013
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5izE1b4wF7i_DNBH_RkuRc2nQb9jA?docId=CNG.ef6f3deddda57db923ae338ab33227f4.231

it appears Weisbrot's duties as an economic consultant for the government is to promote gov propaganda in the English speaking press. No mention of the inflated currency or foreign debt either.

Bacchus4.0

(6,837 posts)
6. looks that way to me
Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:33 PM
Jan 2013

He has criticized the role played by the IMF[11] and has taken an active role in developing the Bank of the South, a joint project by Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela spearheaded by Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez and designed to make South America financially less dependent on the IMF and World Bank.[12][13] Weisbrot acted as a consultant to the governments concerned and has been described as the artífice intelectual, the intellectual architect, of the concept.[14][15]

two employees at CEPR used to work at the Venezuela Information Office, however the CEPR bios page does not mention that fact:

http://www.cepr.net/staff/

http://www.globalexchange.org/events/speaker/deborah-james

http://foreignlobbying.org/client/Embassy%20of%20the%20Bolivarian%20Republic%20of%20Venezuela/

Venezuela Information Office

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela_Information_Office

The Venezuela Information Office (VIO) was a Washington, DC-based lobbying agency with the goal of improving the perception of Venezuela in the United States;[1] its stated mission was "to prevent US intervention in Venezuela".[2] Founded in 2004 by the government of Venezuela,[3] VIO was funded by the Venezuelan government and therefore registered with the United States Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.[4]

A key part of VIO's function was responding to negative coverage of Venezuela in the US media. In addition to maintaining a public websiteand a blog, VIO promoted its views in the media in a number of ways, including issuing press releases, contributing articles (such as responses to the 2008 Human Rights Watch report[5] on Venezuela[6][7]), and being available for interviews.

According to public records the VIO spent $379,000 on lobbying the US Congress in the years 2004 to 2007.[8] In 2004 it also contracted public relations company Lumina Strategies to improve the image of Hugo Chávez and of the Venezuelan government in the United States, supporting and coordinating the media relations work of the VIO

Bacchus4.0

(6,837 posts)
10. An Anarchist At the World Social Forum
Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:05 PM
Jan 2013

But is this socialism as Chavez and his international supporters trumpet? Maybe in the Scandinavian sense of social democracy, but not within any precise definition of the word as it’s been historically defined. Economist Mark Weisbrot, an American adviser to Chavez, told me as we spoke in his room at the Hilton overlooking the hotel swimming pool, that the government’s policies are “gradualist reform.” Still, the reforms are such a departure from the nation’s past that no one looks askance when they are referred to as “21st century socialism.”

http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=2006anarchist_wsf

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
13. That article reminds me of the anarchists view of "The Revolution."
Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:18 PM
Jan 2013
http://libcom.org/library/revolution-delayed-10-years-hugo-chávez’s-rule-charles-reeve-el-libertario

One of the characteristics of South American populism is its woolly ideology! What is the content of the “Bolivarian process”? It’s totally empty! In reality the whole “process” centres on the Chávez personality cult. When we discuss this with comrades from abroad we always emphasise two points. Firstly, how it is simplistic to see Chavismo as the left and the opposition as the right: the best way of not understanding anything!

...

I repeat, in Venezuela’s history left groups have rarely held power and always lacked a “tribune of the masses”. Now, suddenly, they’re experiencing a situation where there is talk of “socialism”, where there is a charismatic figure capable of “mobilising the people”. These left politicians now find themselves in harmony with these mobilisations. They are part of the authorities and have a tribune of the people as represented by Chávez. For these groups, this development is seen as a “gain”. Now there is no question of abandoning “the processes of government”! They are gaining ground and continue to justify anything and everything in the name of this or that tactic. Above all they must avoid losing the tribune represented by the régime. These groups are ready to legitimise and justify anything.

...

Chavismo has another characteristic beside its links with the traditional left. The régime’s project is tied into the current international situation, which supports a global drive for capitalist rule. I will explain: nowadays it is easier to implement the plans of neo-liberal capitalism in a country with a left-wing government which uses populist slogans without provoking real mobilisation on the part of workers. For us, that is Chavismo’s principal role. Of course, I am not saying that all the people and groups who support Chávez are conscious of this. I repeat, Chavismo does not have a homogenous supporter base. There are those who think the régime is doing the best it can to improve the lot of the people… there are even thous who are convinced that today we are experiencing a unique opportunity to “build socialism”. We, for our part, think that this neo-liberal role can be seen in the régime’s policies on oil and trade, and indeed in its whole economic agenda. This manipulative populist rhetoric covers up the real agenda of clearing the way for the implementation of the neo-liberal model, to a greater extent than ever before.


Once I read the anarchist view within Venezuela of Chavismo it became necessary for me to be an opponent to their policies. I had been against Chavez before that, but this is what so clearly made the case against faux-populism that it represents.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
12. Being a shill is one easy way to get paid big bucks.
Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:01 PM
Jan 2013

But it'd be hard to turn down being able to have some effect on an entire government, so I don't blame him. I'm sure he's a true believer.

Bacchus4.0

(6,837 posts)
15. It just seemed a little too coincidental when bad news or big stories come out of Ven
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:23 PM
Jan 2013

and he comes out with an op/ed within 48 hours of the event defending the Chavez administration. I believe that CEPR has taken over the role of the VIO of combating negative press on the adminstration.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
9. Thanks Judi Lynn
Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:46 PM
Jan 2013

Venezuela's reform and progress has as much to do with the will of the people as it does anything else. They've shown time and time again which path they want to take, one which has resulted in the improvements you've noted, above. I believe things will absolutely carry on if Chavez doesn't pull through, he's included them in the process from Day 1.

Judi Lynn

(160,601 posts)
11. He has included them in every sense. That's one of the reasons they refused the coup
Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:46 PM
Jan 2013

against him, once they found out what it was the privately owned and controled "news" media were hiding from them in their news blackout while the coup plotters kidnapped him at gun point and floated the great lie he had quit, using the "news" media to cover u[ for them.

Now they have seen the difference between a progressive leader and what came before him.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
14. UNECLAC declared Venezuela "THE most equal country in Latin America."
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:37 PM
Jan 2013

The UN Economic Commission on Latin America and the Caribbean (UNECLAC) recently declared Venezuela "THE most equal country in Latin America." Numerous polls indicate that the vast majority of Venezuelans like equality--good wages and benefits, high employment rates, excellent economic growth rates (5% to 10% over the last decade), universal health care, good nutrition and infant mortality rates, greatly improved access to education, use of the oil profits for social programs, and--not often mentioned--access to credit and to friendly and strongly regulated banks, fair taxation, government loans and grants to co-operative enterprises, government support for community-oriented and community-chosen development projects, and government promotion of public participation and inclusiveness.

Venezuelans approve of these policies in opinion polls and in the most important polls of all--elections. And they have, according to Jimmy Carter, "the best election system in the world." They recently re-elected the Chavez government by a 10% margin and threw out most of the rightwing governors, in the by-election following the presidential election.

All of this has been independently established, by UN agencies, by the Millennium Project, by every election monitoring group in the world, by independent pollsters, by numerous studies dealing in hard facts and by Venezuelan voters themselves in their choices of political leaders.

So, it doesn't matter in the least that Mark Weisbrot has advised the Bank of the South, or the Venezuelan government or anyone else. His articles are fact-based, REALITY-BASED, well-researched and well-written, and are infinitely more reliable than the so-called 'news' articles in the stupid-making corporate media (including the New York Slimes, which is guilty of egregious, slimy, 1%-er propaganda on the Latin American Left and especially on Chavez/Venezuela, fully as bad as Faux News and the Miami Hairball). (Note: The Slimes are cleverer than the others, in allowing a RARE column on the editorial page, by Mark Weisbrot--while publishing utter crap about these subjects elsewhere in their pages, including their 'news' pages, in what can only be described as a CIA-style campaign against the Latin American Left--a campaign of lies, distortion, disinformation and black holes where information should be.)

Speaking of campaigns: Our anti-Venezuelan, rightwing DU-ers apparently see an opportunity, in Chavez's illness and possible disablement or death, to trot out all of their FAILED rightwing "talking points" ONCE AGAIN, in the hope that Venezuelans can somehow be convinced to reject their own "New Deal" in the coming months, should a special election occur. In this, they may help the CIA stir up whatever trouble they can manage in a period of uncertainty and transition in one of their top target countries. They have failed, time and again, to destabilize Venezuela. Despite millions (and who really knows? perhaps billions) of our tax dollars (certainly billions in LatAm overall, not to mention the Pentagon's "Southern Command" budget) thrown into rightwing causes in Venezuela, in particular, and despite non-stop propaganda from the corporate media, here and there, they have failed to shake Venezuela's democracy and have failed to stop the historic and highly successful leftist democracy movement that Venezuelans helped to inspire.

They have built up a phantom--their bogeyman Chavez--and now they hope to knock him down, and, with him, the hopes, dreams and amazing accomplishments of the people of Venezuela and the people of allied countries, such as Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Uruguay and Nicaragua, who seek a fair and just society and sovereignty (control of their own affairs; no more bloody interference by the U.S. and its transglobal corporate rulers and war profiteers).

Notice how the usual suspects pile on Mark Weisbrot, above--as if his advocacy for fairness and justice in Latin America, and for sovereignty and REAL democracy in Latin America, somehow disqualifies him from citing facts and mentioning reality. His articles are one of the FEW sources that help to explain WHY Venezuelans have voted for the Chavez government time and again, by big majorities, in an election system that is far, FAR more honest and transparent than our own. This is what the corporate press, the CIA and rightwing propagandists DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW. It is the "black hole" in all the corporate, so-called 'news' articles about Venezuela--WHY Venezuelans support the Chavez government.

And the information in Weisbrot's article is key to what will likely happen next, in Venezuela--a fairly smooth transition from one "New Deal" president (Chavez) to the next (his VP, Nicholas Maduro), much like the transition from FDR to Harry Truman. It took transglobal corporations, banksters and war profiteers more than half a century to undo OUR "New Deal." It will take more than Chavez's death to undo Venezuela's, because it is DEEPLY ROOTED in both public participation (real democracy) and success (benefits to the people and the country--also to allied peoples and countries).

Yes, the U.S. has chipped away at the leftist democracy revolution in Latin America (Honduras, Paraguay) and all the billions in our tax dollars for the corrupt, murderous, failed "war on drugs" have had an impact, often quite terrible (Colombia, Honduras, Mexico) as to lives lost, social mayhem and the inability of the affected populations to achieve social justice and real democracy. But the counter-movement remains very strong, indeed. The counter-movement's successes--as to prosperity, sharing prosperity and political and social inclusiveness--are palpable--are undeniable--and, in my opinion, are not reversible, or will not be easily reversible.

Of course, the U.S., and its corporate rulers and war profiteers, and local fascists, will keep trying. They are no doubt peeing in their pants with glee that Chavez may be dying. They can't wait to dance on his grave. But everything they have lied about to this point--WHY Venezuelans support Chavez, THAT Venezuelans are active participants in their own "New Deal," WHY other peoples and leaders around Latin America support and have allied themselves with the Chavez government--all of this strongly militates against them getting their wish: no more "New Deals" for anybody in the world.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Latin America»Continuity Likely Even Wi...