Anti-Social Socialist Socialites

On Sunday state elections were held in Venezuela, one of the most oil-rich countries in Latin America. Hugo Chavez, the loudly socialist leader of that country, suffered heavy losses for the first time in his 10 year rule, losing 5 out of 22 states to the opposition, including the capital city, Caracas. This may be the turning point that the Venezuelan opposition to Chavez has been waiting for.

Chavez (shown here belittling George Bush's manhood: 'Even with binoculars I cannot see it!') is famous for his populist demagoguery, notable even by Latin American standards. What's remarkable about this latest challenge to his power is that it looks like Chavez will be defeated through the mobilisation of voters and through electoral mechanisms, rather than a messy coup.  The Venezuelan opposition has been steadily garnering support through its efficient administration of urban slums, allowing it to cut through much of the ideological nonsense put forth by Chavez's party. The latest financial crisis and the now decreasing price of oil have also put strain on Chavez's populist policies of direct transfers to the poor, revealing the fragility of oil states which systematically placate the disenfranchised by handing out oil cash. This is not a stable or desirable state of affairs, and this is becoming increasingly obvious.

The situation in Venezuela has some parallels to the situation in Thailand that both my Politic Blunder readers will be intimately familiar with by now. Both involve a populist leader with strong support among the rural poor, and both are being opposed by the dissatisfaction of the urban bourgeoisie. The difference between the two situations is that in Thailand the opposition has chosen to make dangerous and undemocratic demands, calling for a 70% unelected parliament and begging the military to stage a coup. In Venezuela, the opposition is now trying to oust Chavez by mobilising voters, providing real administrative alternatives to his rule, and calling for a constructive dialogue, 'from being an 'anti-Chavez' movement to being a 'pro-' movement', in the words of Leopoldo Lopez, one of the opposition leaders. 

Chavez is a deeply dangerous, undemocratic leader whose policies to help the poor have been little more than shallow salves. He continually campaigns to amend the constitution to allow himself to serve for more terms than he should, and has a long history of hostility towards democratic opposition, including shutting down critical television stations and vowing to arrest the opposition's main leader, Manuel Rosales. It seems increasingly likely that he will be toppled, but one can only hope that the killing blow will come from the ballot box rather than the barracks.