Home > Venezuela’s Chavez Avoids Class War

Venezuela’s Chavez Avoids Class War

by Open-Publishing - Wednesday 7 September 2005
12 comments

Governments USA South/Latin America

By Sergio Pareja Law Professor

Pat Robertson’s recently retracted suggestion that the United States should "take out" Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is an extreme echo of the views of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Earlier this year when asked by Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., if there was anything good she could say about Chavez, she responded, "It’s pretty hard ... to find something positive."

I have traveled to Venezuela to visit family all my life. During my most recent trip, I could not avoid hearing about the "evils" of Chavez from the well-off, many of whom are convinced that he will turn Venezuela into a socialist dictatorship. Although this group recognizes that Chavez has done some good things for Venezuela, they think the bad greatly outweighs the good.

The huge lower class, on the other hand, adores Chavez and can point to countless positive developments during his presidency.

While in Venezuela this past June and July, I made it my personal quest to determine why Venezuela’s upper classes hate Chavez. "He’s a socialist," was a common response. Another common response was that he provokes the United States with his anti-imperialist rhetoric.

Other responses I received had more to do with guilt by association: Chavez hangs out with Fidel Castro and even visited Saddam Hussein at least once. Finally, I was commonly told that he is usurping patriotism for his political advantage and that he is trying to pack the courts with judges who think like he does. Sound familiar?

"But what is Chavez doing that you hate so much?" I asked. "What, specifically, are his governing policies?" The answers I received, while purely anecdotal, were telling. In general, the wealthy criticize his taxes and social programs, many of which are remarkably similar to U.S. social programs.

I discovered that, for the first time in Venezuela’s history, the government is truly enforcing its tax laws. What does this mean from a leader who claims to be a "21st century socialist"? I asked my cousin, a successful orthopedic surgeon, what he now must pay in income taxes under Chavez. "10 percent to 15 percent of my income," was the response- not quite the wealth redistribution I’d envisioned.

I also learned that one of the biggest complaints about Chavez is that he has raised the national minimum wage from about $25 a week to about $40 a week. For live-in household servants, the rate increased from about $15 a week to about $25 a week.

To put this in context, this is what it costs to have somebody work for you from before sunrise until after dinner. Servants cook, clean, do laundry, watch your children, and basically do anything you ask them to do.

What else has Chavez done? In exchange for oil to Cuba, Castro has sent teams of Cuban physicians to Venezuela. Chavez then sends them into poor neighborhoods to provide free health care for people who have never seen a doctor in their lives.

In addition, he has built vocational schools in poor neighborhoods so poor people can learn skills that will allow them to earn more. The wealthy view this as raising the cost of labor.

What else has Chavez done? The Chavez government uses its oil wealth to hire workers to engage in public works projects, such as fixing potholes in roads, keeping parks clean, and improving public buildings. For example, the government is building the first-ever public subway system in Valencia. People of means complain that "only poor people will use it."

The government also has started a housing program for the poor through which the government works with builders to build livable, low-cost housing. It works with banks to provide long-term, low-interest loans to home buyers.

The feeling I got in Venezuela last month is that people with money still have money. I saw an abundance of new expensive cars on the road. One of my uncles continues to build and run high- rise apartments and hotels at a healthy profit.

I saw a complete freedom to speak out against the government, with daily newspaper articles and songs on the radio calling for Chavez’s ouster. It made me question our freedom here in the United States. With so many people here opposed to the war in Iraq, and with some brilliant anti-war songs being written, why haven’t I heard even one of those songs on the radio?

I am painfully aware that Chavez may ultimately turn out to be a cruel and corrupt dictator. That has been the history of Venezuela, and it certainly could happen again.

However, by giving a voice to the poor, Chavez also may have prevented a bloody class war. I have seen that Venezuelan war coming for years.

It is an embarrassment that our secretary of state doesn’t see, or won’t admit to seeing, any of the good that Chavez has done. It’s also an embarrassment that the founder of the largest Christian political organization in this country would call for Chavez’s assassination.

Sergio Pareja teaches at the University of New Mexico School of Law.

http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/g...

Forum posts

  • Don’t people realize that the world is enmeshed in class warfare? Can’t people understand that it’s not those commies waiting to do us in? Can’t people understand that two idealogies can’t exist side by side? Can’t people understand that due to the currant human mental developement the gross human emotions rule, of which are avarice, greed, power, and recognition? So, will the planet servive before our human failings destroy it? Big question!!

  • Dear Sergio,

    Although your appreciation of the social work to the poor by Chavez are right, and that is the biggest support he is getting from. Let me explain you what he is doing outright bad:

    1.- He changed the entire congress to support his cause, leaving a short minority group, just to keep the appearances.
    2.- He changed the entire Supreme Court whith only supporters of his own cause. If we compare credentials by credentials the current Judges of the Venezuelan Supreme Court with the ones from previous goverments you will see the differences. There Judges that just do not qualify to be in that position.
    3.- All the critical govermental positions were taken over by Chavez followers, including the General Attorney (Fiscal General) and other critial positions.
    4.- He created the largest discrimination list known in the hystory in the world: The Tascon’s List. Using this list he is neglecting some venezuelans the right to get basic public services (like driver license, passport, job at the public administration, etc).

    Although I think that his social programs are good, he is just subsidizing the poors. He is leaving out Venezuelans that can do that work and disregarding their right to work. His social programs are rotten with corruption and mismanagement. His mischief behaviour towards other citizens that he just insult in his Sunday TV show is disgusting.

    If you want me to continue on this line just give me a call: 617-551-4622.

    David

    • I got to this article through an e-newsletter I get everyday. Where do you live, David?

      Because if you took the names out of all the statements you made, they may be confused as describing George W. Bush.

      Makes me laugh a little.

      – AC

  • Rebutting the previous posters points: the Asamblea Nacional (Congress) was chosen in free democratic elections, not by Chavez. The Supreme Court Justices, Attorney General and other government posts have been selected by the President/government according to the Constitution. The constitution, by the way is the most progressive in the Western Hemisphere, dividing power between the traditinal 3 powers and two more: the Electoral Court Power and the People. This constitution was approved by more than 60% of the population in a referendum.

    There is much corruption and problems, but these are endemic to Venezuela. The opposition has simply realized that they can no longer cry communism because Chavez is clearly respecting private property and the market system (with logical controls) so now they attack his specific policies.

    • I have to rebut the previous comments that the Venezuelans’ contitution was approved by 60 % of the population. What the previous poster might wanted to say was that the constitution was approved by 60 % of the votes (whihc is completely different). Anyway, Hitler was also elected democratically, he changed his contry constitution, changed the congress, and created popular guerrillas to support his case, pretty much similar to what Chavez has done in Venezuela. The two other powers created by the "new" constitution are just ignored and do nothing for the majority that oppose to the President.

      The corruption in this goverment has overwhelmed previous mismanagement. Venezuelan’s live an autocratic goverment with deep signs of tyranny.

      David

    • Exactly ’204’. There will always be the monied minority fearfull of loseing their hold. Rice can’t find ’something positive’ about Chavez? Of course not. He’s not doing anything to benefit her and her like minded power hungry hounds. Can’t squander resourses on the needy. They want the large portion of the pie. ’let them eat cake’!!!

    • It is always funny to read about Hitler as if he were the last mass-killing president of our times. Is there any current information around the context of those who say that?

      About the Constitution of Venezuelan being approved by 60% percent of the registered voters, it is absolutely true. The registered voters in Venezuela were about 9 million out 23 million inhabitants; less than 50% of the population. During Chavez administration, the registered voters have risen all the way up to approx. 14 million out of 24million; above the 50%.

      As the reader can tell what Chavez has been doing in Venezuela is setting up the bases for a very slow (like every social change) inclusion process. Literacy, health and job-training programs have enabled a muted population to go out and be human in the legal sense for the first time; voting.

      Even though Chavez’s policies in Venezuela have increased significantly the number of registered voters, he keeps the same (aprox) 60% of support.

      To the oppositions, horror, he has achieved all this changes in favor of the poor of a country which has been rich out of oil for more than 90 years in democratic way.

      There was a national referendum for:
      1 Deciding if we were to have a new constitution composed. Result: yes

      (Elections to figure who the composers elected by county were to be in the Constitution composing committee)
      (Constitution was printed and widely distributed to engender support and critics before the next referendum)
      (Opposition, AKA media publicized how “terrible” and “anti-democratic” the new constitution was while people could read it by themselves and make their own judgment)

      2 Deciding if newly composed constitution were to be establish as binding in Venezuela’s territory. Result: YES

      (Media made a campaign claiming that under a new constitution, there should be new presidential elections)

      (Presidential elections took place under a dirty campaign against Chavez. Result: yes, for Chavez)

      I got to go… but later on, a coup d’Etat, a national strike by corporations, then a referendum, result of them all: yes, for Chavez

      The opposition is really in despair and will from now on come up with new excuses to get rid of a president that supports the actual majority of a wealthy country that let former-governments (the nowadays opposition) generate 80% of poverty. Redistribution of wealth is in fact taking place. Now how long does that take? How does it take to learn to read, get a degree, save money and buy a house? It will take a life. Venezuelans who support this historical process are working for the future of their children and grandchildren rather than for their own profit or benefit. This is something admirable in our days.

      Visit: http://groups.google.com/group/Mision-Venezuela and read non-corporational produced news.

    • Yes, you are right, "138." Hitler is not the last "mass-killing president of our times.", and definetely Chavez is the one willing to take his post in the mean hystory.

      You are outright wrong when you said that the constitution was approved by 60 % of the registered voters. And now that I realized, the title of this article is outright wrong too, Chavez never avoided a class war, he has deepen the social issues among civilians ignoring half of the population and creating a segregation list for those who opposed to him in the so call referendum. Those poor victims are now without govermental benefits and left out of any social programs, without any right to get a job in the public administration (no passport, etc). We are talking of more than 3 million venezuelan citizens that are discriminated (humilliated and attacked in some cases) because of their political preferences. This has never ever happened in Venezuela or South America before and under the tyrany of Chavez, Venezuelans are suffering the madness of an authoritarian ruler.

    • Maybe you are a wealthy person. The wealthy are totally against Chavez because of his economic reforms and nationalization of essential commodities, and land reform...the wealthy always cry like stuck pigs when their exploitation and domination comes to an end.

      Or maybe you are just brainwashed David because the ordinary citizens of Venezuela support Chavez for what he is doing for them. We need someone like him in the U.S.A. and we wouldn’t be seeing what we are here as we deteroriate into a third world country being run by a military dictatorship owned by the oil barons.

    • Yes, human will, WILL prevail. Afterall, thats what evolution is all about. The betterment of the human species. There will be setbacks of course, but in the long run, decency, justice for all humanity will prevail. The pampered minority understand this, and no matter how many armies they assemble, the majority will succeed!

  • Dear Professor Pareja:

    While your commentary attempts to portray the virtues of Venezuela’s current government, it oversimplifies the nice-looking trees at the danger of ignoring the forest. I will first respond to your specific examples, and then I will attempt to frame the big picture appropriately.

    Historically, Venezuela has avoided the policy of taxing income, and this policy might seem odd to most US Citizens. Consider however that Venezuela’s oil, natural gas, iron, and copper industries are all “nationalized”, and that this policy has existed for more than 35 years. This is Venezuela’s trade-off. Government, and not the private sector, owns the land resources, and most all of government’s revenue is generated by taxes and profits from those resources. Consider the US Government owning Exxon-Mobile, Alcoa, and the like. Would it also need our income taxes? Further consider oil at a 60.00 per barrel average with no sign of retreat. Just how much revenue does Venezuela’s government need?

    While I agree that all governments need revenue to operate effectively, I believe that Venezuela’s government is flush with cash. Furthermore, the government has become less accountable and open and more centralized, a perfect recipe for pocket lining. In short, the income tax is Chavez’ way of cementing his populist support. The poor majority, with little or no income, has nothing to lose and everything to gain from strict income tax laws. But revenge has no place in a stable society.

    I do not disagree with your second point about household servants. The only thing I would add is that any thoughtful and kind upper middle class family should consider paying even more. Both sides of society are responsible for the class difference that is so apparent in Venezuela, and the upper class is now reaping the harvest that it has sown over the past 50 years.

    Chavez’ “Barrio Adentro” program is the perfect example of a poorly executed and badly managed good idea.

    The US also has underserved communities with limited access to health care. But instead of importing foreign-educated health care workers, US policy encourages domestic workers to practice in those underserved communities, and Gallup, New Mexico is full of such doctors and nurses. I use this example to illustrate the vocation to public service that exists today in the US. Another example is Teach for America, which accepts only a small fraction of the thousands of top-notch recent college graduates who apply to teach school in underserved US communities.

    Compare Venezuela. Offer a recent graduate in Venezuela a job providing medical services or educating the poor and that graduate will probably reject the offer. Public service is shunned because confidence in public institutions has eroded to an historic low. Add the current government’s polarizing rhetoric and the response to such a call should be obvious. I propose that Chavez could have done more to encourage Venezuela’s college graduates to participate in Barrio Adentro. Chavez may have chosen not to because he may have preferred Cubans, who have a history of complying with whatever government asks of them, over similarly educated Venezuelans, who are not as compliant and are largely from the upper middle class. Exclusion has no place in a stable society.

    The “revolutionary” angle of Barrio Adentro, and of other similar programs in Venezuela is not addressed. There are currently more than 30,000 Cuban doctors, teachers, and “physical education trainers” in Venezuela. For most Cubans, a job in Venezuela is an opportunity for an improved lifestyle, and no doubt Castro and Chavez influence the factors used to select those who will participate. I propose that this selection process favors Cubans who are willing to extol the virtues of centralized government. And there is plenty of anecdotal evidence showing that a poor Venezuelan gets a civics lesson along with a physical upon visiting the doctor.

    As for the vocational schools, they are a poorly managed extension of the revolution. Imagine a vocational school where students learn Linux instead of Windows, and where they learn “constitutional law.” Better yet, go to Venezuela and witness it for yourself. I propose that Venezuela’s government has an internal policy of excluding what works well when it is “capitalist”, and that it has a further policy spoon-feeding its own version of law to the poor who simply need more basic education before attempting to digest such a topic.

    The streets, parks, and buildings of Caracas are some of the dirtiest and most dangerous that I have ever seen. Ten years ago they were bad, and now they are much worse. Chavez may have many workers on payroll, but the proof is in the pudding. That many workers receive a paycheck without working would be abnormal in the US. Not so in Venezuela. I propose that Venezuela’s current government, with its record revenue, has been most corrupt and least effective in attempting to provide these basic services.

    Public transportation and low-income education and housing projects are responsible social policy, and shame on Venezuelans “of means” who reject them because only poor people will use them or because they raise the cost of labor. Again, this demonstrates the divisiveness that exists in today’s Venezuelan society. And while the poverty on one end of the spectrum tends toward the financial, the poverty on the other tends toward the moral. Two wrongs do not however make a right. And I propose that a Venezuelan who wears a red beret when turning in his housing loan application is treated much differently from a Venezuelan who writes an article like this one.

    Saying that complete freedom to speak out against the government exists in Venezuela is a little like saying that complete freedom exists to say anything over US broadcast media. People do it all the time, but occasionally they get “caught”. One difference is that thugs ransack a Venezuelan radio station for expressing undesirable political speech, while right-wingers simply fine a US radio station for getting too raunchy. Another difference is that even though thugs may ransack, the Venezuelan media has the courage to continue expressing the speech.

    After tallying the good and bad, I propose that Chavez is bad for Venezuela, and here are a few more reasons that are not addressed:

    · Property is taken without just compensation;
    · The liberty to invest abroad does not exist;
    · The liberty to travel abroad is severely limited; and
    · The right to vote is an onerous burden.

    The separation of powers, governmental accountability, and public confidence in governmental institutions are virtually non-existent in Hugo Chavez’ Venezuela. And his irresponsible, shoot-from-the-hip rhetoric has soiled the Office of the Presidency of Venezuela, an office that Venezuelans elected him care take. Unlike other Latin American countries, Venezuela is blessed with an abundance of natural, human, and environmental resources, and there can be no acceptable reason why Venezuela should be unstable. However, with every day that Chavez continues along the path of centralized power and strong-armed nationalism, the trees in Venezuela begin to look more and more like a jungle.

    **The author is a Venezuelan American US-educated lawyer in New York City who travels often to Venezuela and who reads the Venezuelan press every day. His father and five uncles live in Venezuela, and all voted for Chavez in 1998. Only one uncle continues to support Venezuela’s governmental policies. During the August ‘04 referendum, all waited for more than 10 hours to vote. Last month, the author’s father waited in line for two days and nights to apply for a Venezuelan passport.

  • the guy deserves the Nobel Prize... Chavez that is