August 18, 2006

A parting thought for the weekend, courtesy of Yasuri Yamileth


Katy says: The singer of the reggaeton-du-jour Yasuri Yamileth (aka Panamanian songstress Catherine Severino, not the girl in the video btw) is in Caracas, and the "in" crowd held a bash for her. The petro-dollars come and go, but the joi-de-vivre remains the same.

Can this be a country on the cusp of total cubanization?

Can any self-respecting revolution allow this kind of behavior? You don't see this stuff in Minsk, Havanna or Tehran...

Is "bochinche, bochinche, bochinche" our only real political movement?

'Til Monday. Behave folks, if not ... les saco la Yilé.

Compiling a photographic record

Katy says: I am going to ask Quico's loyal readers for a favor in an experiment I have in mind.

Any time you see a pro-Chávez sign in a government building or institution such as this one, I'd like to know about it. So I want to ask all of you out there to take and/or circulate photographs showing electoral publicity for Chávez in a government building, and I'd like you to send them to me.

Bruni is doing a great job of covering government advertising in her blog. We should do the same with government publicity in public buildings.

So any time you go to a hospital, a courtroom or a school, and see publicity for Chávez's re-election, please snap a picture and send it to me. Any time you drive past a government building and there is a picture of Chavez, take a pic and send it. Include whenever you can the place where the photo was taken, and the date.

My email is katycaracas@hotmail.com.

I will make sure these are published on this website. Confidentiality is assured.

La pelea es peleando - cuento con ustedes.

August 17, 2006

Quote of the day

"No es la espada de Bolívar, es la chequera de Venezuela la que camina por América Latina."
Manuel Rosales, upon announcing his campaign team.

Trans: "It's not Bolívar's sword, but rather Venezuela's checkbook that is marching through Latin America."

Note: This is in reference to Chavez's famous saying that Bolivar's sword, i.e. his revolution, was on the march through Latin America.

Insulza, politics and fingerprinting machines


Katy says: I was driving in traffic today when, on the radio, people were talking about a speech OAS Secretary-General José Miguel Insulza made a few days ago at the General Convention of Chile's Socialist Party. Insulza was more or less saying that Chile's success was more political than economic, reminding people of the old adage that the only way to advance in politics is to negotiate and compromise.

Insulza is a guy who got the right-wing opposition to vote in favor or dismantling most of the reforms in Pinochet's constitution, so he certainly knows what he is talking about. Since I was stuck in traffic, my mind started wandering and I began thinking about fingerprinting machines.

Yesterday, CNE President Tibisay Lucena insisted that voters could not refuse to use fingerprinting machines when voting, as CNE director Vicente Díaz had suggested a few days earlier. For whatever reason, chavistas are dead set against doing away with these machine, no matter how unreliable or expensive they are.

The opposition's case against the machines is three-fold. We allege that the machines violate the secrecy of the vote, that they allow the CNE to observe in real time who has voted and who hasn't, and that they are not reliable enough to prevent people from voting multiple times.

The second point is apparently a non-issue, since the CNE has hinted that the machines will work off-line the day of the election. The first point I will not address here since I don't know the technical details of what can be done to prevent the sequence of the vote from being recorded.

But here's a thought on the third point: why don't opposition representatives propose the use of both fingerprinting machines and indelible ink? Our side's argument has been that double voting was never a real issue since everyone had to dip their pinkies in indelible ink to vote. If chavistas are simply not going to negotiate regarding the machines, then why not use both methods at the same time?

It's a no-lose proposal. The CNE could not possibly come up with a credible reason to deny the use of ink alongside the use of the machines. If the purpose is to prevent double voting, then what is the problem with having an extra safeguard? This one is relatively inexpensive, widely used internationally and one which our side is comfortable with. It is also something Venezuelans are familiar with.

In order to advance, we will have to meet the CNE halfway. The best way to do it is by putting forward proposals that point in the same direction of the positions the CNE is publicly assuming. It will be difficult -though not impossible- for them to say no to this.

August 16, 2006

Boyd v. Livingstone

Katy says: The latest round in the dispute between Venezuelan blogger Alek Boyd and London mayor Ken Livingstone is not to be missed.

August 15, 2006

Speaking of PDVSA...



Katy says: Here is a nice little picture I got today. It is from some sort of PDVSA office, and the slogan reads "toward 10 million", as in 10 million votes for Chávez. The two hands and the slogan are an integral part of Mr. Chávez's re-election campaign.

The Economist, on PDVSA


Katy says: Influential British magazine The Economist (registration required) has a very interesting article on national oil companies and how they have often served as cash cows for governments instead of behaving like profit-maximizing companies. Not surprisingly, the article starts off with tales of PDVSA, past and present. An excerpt:

...

"EXXON MOBIL is the world's most valuable listed company, with a market capitalisation of $412 billion. But if you compare oil companies by how much they have left in the ground, the American giant ranks a lowly fourteenth. All 13 of the oil firms that outshadow it are national oil companies (NOCs): partially or wholly state-owned firms through which governments retain the profits from oil production. Because these national champions control as much as 90% of the world's oil and gas, they can do far more than the likes of Exxon to assuage the current worries about supply and to influence the accompanying record prices. But like most state-owned firms, they are prone to over-staffing, underinvestment, political interference and corruption.

Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), one of the biggest (see chart on the next page), provides a cautionary tale of how bad they can be. Venezuela has exported oil since the 16th century, when the mother of the Hapsburg emperor, Charles V, had some shipped to Spain to treat his crippling gout. Big multinationals, such as Royal Dutch Shell, set up shop in Venezuela almost a century ago. By the 1930s the country was the world's second-biggest oil producer. Today it remains one of the main sources of American oil imports. There is also huge potential to expand production: if you include its near-endless supply of treacly "ultra-heavy" oil, Venezuela has the world's biggest reserves.

Like many developing countries, Venezuela nationalised its oil industry in the 1970s. But its politicians were mindful of the extravagant mess that Pemex, Latin America 's biggest NOC at the time, had made of Mexico's oilfields since the 1930s. So the Venezuelans devised a structure to minimise the disruption. Former foreign concessions became free-standing divisions of PDVSA, with many of their existing managers left in place.

From these sensible beginnings, PDVSA developed a reputation for professionalism and competence, matched by few other NOCs. The company was thought to be relatively free from the corruption and cronyism that had spread through Venezuela, fuelled by oil wealth. It was certainly efficient, producing as much oil as Pemex did with a third of the staff.

In the 1990s the Venezuelan oil company embarked on a scheme to raise output to 6.5m barrels per day (b/d). This would be done by increasing its own production and farming out marginal fields to foreign firms. The idea, says Luis Giusti, who ran PDVSA from 1994 to 1999, was to make use of multinationals' technology and capital without surrendering the most lucrative opportunities to them.

By 1998 some 36 foreign firms had set up shop and were rapidly expanding their output. PDVSA, meanwhile, had already reached 2.9m b/d and was seeking the government's blessing to invest more to increase its production capacity. But royalties were falling along with the oil price. With an election looming, the government slashed the company's investment budget instead. Output promptly started to fall and has never recovered.

Partly because of geology and partly because of their age, Venezuela 's fields require a lot of maintenance. The oil they produce is more viscous and acidic than the norm, and so harder to handle. Less than a tenth of the fields simply spout oil thanks to the natural pressure of the reservoir. Keeping the remainder flowing requires constant injections of water or gas. Even so, their output declines at roughly twice the pace of oilfields in the North Sea. Venezuela has to add 400,000 b/d of new annual production capacity just to keep output stable, according to Mazhar al-Shereidah, an academic.

That is even more expensive than it sounds, because each well produces only a small amount: perhaps 180 b/d, compared with as much as 7,000 b/d from some Persian Gulf wells. It takes Venezuela ten times more wells than Saudi Arabia to produce a third of the oil. No wonder that at the height of its expansion in 1997, PDVSA was investing $5.4 billion, according to Wood Mackenzie, a consultancy.

But when President Hugo Chávez came to power in 1999, he started squeezing even more money out of the firm. By 2000 investment had fallen to $2.5 billion. Mr Chávez accused PDVSA of hiding its profits from the government through deceptive accounting. He also questioned the firm's expansion plans and overseas acquisitions. Above all, he decried its relative autonomy and appointed a number of hostile bosses to impose his authority.

PDVSA's management, naturally, resented this. They joined a general strike in December 2002, along with half of the firm's 40,000 employees. Most of the skilled staff, including engineers and technicians, stopped work for two months. Since—like patients in intensive care—many of PDVSA's wells require constant monitoring and treatment, says Mr al-Shereidah, the strike killed lots of them. Analysts estimated that Venezuela lost as much as 400,000 b/d of production capacity for ever, not to mention billions of dollars in revenue.

But the worst was still to come. Mr Chávez denounced the strikers as saboteurs and sacked them all. The toll was highest among skilled workers: two-thirds of managers and technical staff went. At a stroke, PDVSA lost almost all of its most experienced and best-qualified employees, with an irreplaceable understanding of the idiosyncrasies of its wells and fields.

Critics say that the government restaffed the firm with incompetent cronies and placemen. Contractors whisper that it is having trouble spending even its reduced investment budget. Bids take months longer than necessary to complete, one contractor complains, because the procurement staff cannot get their technical specifications straight. Others point to an increase in fatal accidents and fires at PDVSA's refineries as proof that its workers are no longer up to snuff.

Staffing has certainly become more political. Mr Chávez's cousin, Asdrubal, runs the firm's shipping arm. The president's brother, Adan, helps to co-ordinate the company's subsidised oil sales around the Caribbean as ambassador to Cuba . Those who signed a petition advocating a recall election for Mr Chávez complain that they cannot get jobs at PDVSA or its contractors.

Politics has begun to intrude into the firm's strategy, too. Mr Chávez wants PDVSA to do less business in the United States and more in Latin America. In the name of regional integration, he is pushing for an expensive natural-gas pipeline from Venezuela to Brazil , which would "bring gas that does not exist to markets that do not exist", in Mr Giusti's view. In theory, the hugoducto, as the pipeline is sarcastically known, will be a money-making venture, but Mr Chávez has also dragooned the company into all manner of charitable works. He insists that the firm spend a tenth of its investment budget on social programmes, and has pledged its help, in the form both of cheap oil and technological assistance, to allies from Argentina to the Bahamas.

Clearly, Venezuela's oil company no longer operates at arm's length from the government. Its head, Rafael Ramírez, is also the Minister of Energy and Oil. "The president tells PDVSA to commit suicide, and he says, 'Yes sir!'" gripes Elie Habalian, a former Venezuelan representative at OPEC, with a mock salute.

The company is also becoming more secretive. It has de-registered its refining subsidiary, Citgo, at America's Securities and Exchange Commission, and so no longer files any public reports to the organisation. In Venezuela, the Ministry of Energy and Oil has only just released the 2003 edition of its annual statistical compendium on the company's performance. Its finances are certainly getting murkier: it now transfers much of its earnings directly to a development fund controlled by Mr Chávez, rather than sending them all to the central bank as it used to.

Despite these worrying trends, the government claims that PDVSA has fully recovered from the strike and sackings, and is now producing more than it did beforehand. Officially, it is still planning to raise output to almost 4m b/d by 2012. But observers scoff at such notions. The company can no longer maintain its own fields, let alone complete the many new projects it is pursuing, says Diego González, who used to work for its gas division. Wood Mackenzie estimates that output slumped to less than 1.2m b/d in 2003. It subsequently recovered a bit, to 1.6m b/d, but is now falling again.

These failings have not stopped Mr Chávez from forcing most foreign oil firms in Venezuela to go into partnership with its national champion. It is now running the resulting joint ventures—presumably no better than it runs its original fields. Other countries go further: Saudi Aramco, for one, has a monopoly on oil production in Saudi Arabia. PFCEnergy, a consultancy, calculates that 77% of the world's oil and gas is found in countries whose production is controlled by state-owned oil firms and their partners."

...

Later on, the article says:

...

"Happily, not all NOCs are as badly run as PDVSA. But their problems are similar, if not as severe. Many suffer from government meddling of one sort or another. Legal requirements to hire a certain number of locals have left the state firms of several Persian Gulf emirates hopelessly over-staffed. Russia uses its NOCs, Gazprom and Rosneft, as instruments of foreign policy. The governments of China and India, among others, oblige their state firms to sell petrol below the international price at the pump, even though they have to buy much of it on the open market. Bolivia, meanwhile, cannot decide whether it wants an NOC at all. It has opened its oil industry to foreign investment and then nationalised it no fewer than three times."

...

The article is a must-read. It makes many of the same points Terry Karl made in The Paradox of Plenty, her legendary book on the many ills of petro-states. It is also a point reaffirmed by Quico in his post on Petrostates. Still, it is nice to see these important issues being raised yet again by a regarded publication such as The Economist that appeals to such a wide audience.

Let's wait and see how the chavista propaganda machine try spin its way out of this mauling.

August 14, 2006

Flying the coop


Katy says: Venezuelans woke up Sunday to the news that jailed union leader Carlos Ortega had fled Ramo Verde military prison along with three other jailed military officers. Ortega became famous as one of the opposition figureheads in the events of 2001-2003, particularly the general strike that shut down oil production and a big part of the economy.

I know Quico is not a big fan of Ortega's, and neither am I, so I will leave the discussion about his tactics, his biography, his legal wrangling or his decision to flee prison to the comments forum. I would, however, like to draw attention to what this breakout says about the government. Leaving aside the issue of why a civilian union leader was serving time in a military jail (Guantánamo, anyone?), the fact that Ortega fled can be interpreted in many different ways.

The first thing it says is that this government is too incompetent for its own good. For all of Carlos Andrés Pérez's political weakness post-1992, he made sure Hugo Chávez stayed in Yare Prison. Security at Yare was not top-notch, with the occasional reporter or coupster managing to sneak inside and record a conversation or a call to arms. But Pérez, Caldera and even freakin'-Ramón J. Velásquez made sure the guy did not flee under their watch. Caldera may have pardoned him, but before that Chávez remained in his cell.

Upon closer inspection, one wonders if all is well in the Armed Forces. One of the reasons for putting Ortega in Ramo Verde was - I assume - that security is less prone to being compromised. After all, the Armed Forces were purged of non-chavista elements a long time ago, or so we are made to think. The Defense Minister is now saying there was internal complicity. If so, with whom? Is the military conspiring against the government? Who knew about this, and how? Will we ever know the truth? Who will be the scapegoat?

Then there are the "situation-room" theories. One is that Ortega and the officers were allowed to flee so the government could kill them upon re-locating them. This one seems convoluted to me: if the government wanted to kill or disappear them, it could do so without so much hassle. Aside from that, what does the government gain by killing these guys?

Another theory is that they are being set free to see if they lead the government to bigger fish. Sources informed me toward the end of last year that Gen. Néstor González González was hiding inside Venezuela. Could it be that Ortega made a deal with the government to lead them to the hiding general?

Finally, it could be that the government intentionally set Ortega and the military free to remind the Venezuelan public about the oppositión's strike. With Ortega now free, the government can begin spinning theories about how Ortega is the mastermind behind the Rosales candidacy and other nonsense. Perhaps Ortega can mobilize the government's core voters (and in the process, turn ni-nis against the opposition) if he looms as a menace, as the ghost of strikes past. And if you think Ortega does not ignite the passions of hard-core chavistas, wait and see what happens in the comments part of this post.

No explanation is completely satisfactory, but they all seem to work on some level.

PS.- Thanks to Maria from the comments forum for the link to the picture...

A quiz


Katy says: As everyone knows, Chávez went to Cuba to visit Fidel Castro, courtesy of Venezuelan taxpayers. Here's a question to test your knowledge of bolivarian/revolutionary knicknacks.

The phallic item being held by Castro and Chávez in the picture on the left is:
a) a vibrator
b) Chávez's first-communion candle
c) the dissected penis of Bolívar's white horse
d) a light saber
e) a copy of Simón Bolívar's dagger

(Note: I believe the answer is e, but I am not sure)

August 11, 2006

Literature as a revolutionary propaganda tool


Katy says: Venezuela has just announced that it will not participate as the guest of honor in the La Paz Book Fair. Our country's representatives allege that this fair supports a "mercantilistic" view of literature, and that instead Venezuela will host a counter-fair through which 25,000 books will be distributed freely, courtesy of Venezuelan taxpayers.

The director of the National Book Center said that "books are not merchandise, but an instrument in the struggle for freedom", and that he wants literature "to stop being a privilege for the elites." (sic)

Oh, how noble. If only this were a reflection of the government's actual policies at home. It is well known that, in Venezuela, books are outrageously expensive, thanks in part to high taxes and import tariffs.

To drive this point home, I did a little experiment and compared some of the prices listed in Venezuela's Tecniciencia chain of bookstores with the primary bookseller of the empire and Satan himself, Amazon.

Here's a sample:

On Tecniciencia's website, a copy of Mario Vargas Llosa's "Travesuras de la Niña Mala" will set you back 45,000 bolívars, roughly US$21.42 at the fixed rate. I'm not sure this includes the Value-added tax or not, but let's be conservative and assume it does.

The same book on Amazon costs you $13.57.

Arthur Golden's "Memoirs of a Geisha" sells for Bs. 55,000 ($26.19) in Venezuela, and for US$7.99 in the US.

Laura Restrepo's "Dulce Compañía"? Bs. 40,000 ($19.04) in Venezuela; $10.62 in the US.
Laura Esquivel's "Malinche"? Bs. 50,000 ($23.80) in Venezuela, $15.61 in the US.
J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone"? Bs. 24,500 ($11.66) in Venezuela, $8.99 in the US.
Azar Nafisi's "Reading Lolita in Teheran"? Bs. 58.000 ($27.62) in Venezuela, $9.72 in the US.

Now, dear reader, I realize you are entitled to be skeptical about this back-of-the-envelope comparison. What about Venezuelan authors?

Federico Vegas' wonderful must-read "Falke" (another post on this some other time) sells for Bs. 55,000 ($26.19). I couldn't find a price quote overseas, but Vegas' "Venezuelan Vernacular" goes for $11.95 in Burbank, CA (according to Abebooks) so the price for Falke probably won't be that far off.

Chavista intellectual and author Luis Britto García's "Por los signos de los signos", published by our very own state publisher Monteávila Editores, sells for a healthy Bs. 30,000 on Tecniciencia, or $14.28. Perhaps Bolivians will get to read Britto García for free - and in the process find out what a piece-of-crap author he is.

In fact, one of the few instances I found of books being cheaper in Venezuela was über-communist (and anti-chavista) author Domingo Alberto Rangel's "Gómez, el amo del poder". This book sells for a modest Bs. 20,000 ($9.52) at Tecniciencia. The same book is not listed in Amazon, but according to Abebooks, you can get a copy in Llibres de Companyia in trendy Barcelona, Spain, for a mere US$11.86. At least there appears to be some consistency to Rangel's values. Perhaps chavistas would do well buying the book, sitting at a café in the ramblas, buying themselves a Café Latte or some churros con chocolate and railing against capitalism when compared to chavista altruism. In the process, they should try and learn some communism from people who actually try to practice it.

You see, you can't go around telling people you believe books should be available to all when your own country's tax policy prevents all but the rich from affording books.

This, of course, is by no means a scientific study on the Venezuelan books market. It is a simple gimmick to llustrate the hypocrisy in giving away books in Bolivia while heavily taxing them at home. It's the world upside down, but if you are gullible enough to believe official propaganda, it's the dawn of the new man.

August 10, 2006

Retaliation chronicles


Katy says: Wednesday, August 1, 3:50 AM: Former CNE President and chavista figure, Jorge Rodríguez, goes to Clínica El Ávila (one of Venezuela's most prestigious private medical centers) for a checkup after a car accident. He ends up in Clínica La Floresta where he is diagnosed with two apparently small fractures in his ribs and a bump in his head.

Wednesday, August 1: State news agency ABN reports the incident with the unbiased headline "Clínica Ávila refused medical attention to former CNE President". The news item does not include the clinic's response to these allegations.

Thursday, August 3: El Universal says that the Prosecutor General's office has begun an investigation into the reasons why Rodríguez was denied treatment at Clínica El Ávila. Medical staff at the clinic allege that Rodríguez was taken to La Floresta in one of their ambulances after a woman accompanying Rodríguez (presumably his sister, Minister Delcy Rodríguez) went ballistic on the attending physician, who had to lock herself up in a room.

Thursday, August 3: Clínica El Ávila President Mario García says that Rodríguez was taken care of like any other emergency patient, that his vital conditions were stable but that the attending physician had recommended a CAT scan to rule out internal problems. The physician informed Rodríguez that the Clinic's CAT scan was broken, and they suggested he go instead to Clínica La Floresta.

Thursday, August 3: Venezuela's tax authority shuts down the administrative offices of Clínica El Ávila for 48 hours, apparently due to errors in some of the paperwork. There is no allegation of tax evasiuon or tax fraud. The procedure was done by 15 employees from the tax office, who inspected the Clinic accompanied by 42 inspectors from the Ministry of Health, who apparently inspected everything from medical machinery to the medicines being administered.

Thursday, August 10: El Universal reports that the Health Ministry has shut down the Clinic's lab, pharmacy and three of its operating rooms. No word yet on whether the CAT scan machine was or was not in working conditions.

Questions:

- Why are tax authorities called on to investigate what is, by all accounts, a case of apparent medical malpractice?

- Why is the government so keen on meddling in a private dispute between a private citizen and a private health-care facility?

- Why is the Health Ministry so keen on inspecting one of the country's most presitigious private clinics, when public hospitals in Venezuela are in such shabby conditions?

- Is there any truth to reports that Rodríguez had a portion of Clínica La Floresta vacated for his security personnel?

- What ever happened to figuring out whether or not the CAT scan machine was functional?

- If the machine wasn't functional, what role does the CADIVI roadblock play into it?

- Why would the clinic that is supposedly denying medical treatment allegedly take Rodríguez to another clinic in one of its ambulances?

- Do all tax/health inspections require a commando-style operation by 57 employees?

August 9, 2006

Man(uel) of the hour


Katy says: Manuel Rosales, two-term governor of the state of Zulia, in Western Venezuela, has just been confirmed as the single presidential candidate of a substantial portion of the opposition to Hugo Chávez's pseudo-socialist revolution. The announcement was made today in Caracas, after Venezuela's CNE decided yesterday that Rosales did not need to resign from his governorship but rather take a temporary leave of absence.

Zulia (where I am from, by the way) is Venezuela's most populous state. It is the home of a big chunk of Venezuela's oil wealth, as well as some of the best agricultural land in the country. It is also the home of some of Venezuela's most distinctive cultural manifestations, such as gaitas and the cult of the Virgin of La Chinita. Maracaibo, the state capital, is Venezuela's second-largest city. Once a sprawling big town riddled with problems, it has sort of come of age, and the city looks cleaner and more prosperous than many other places in the country.

Both Quico and I have expressed our misgivings about Rosales on several occasions. Both of us have come forward in favour of other candidates, such as Rausseo or Borges. However, today is not the time to dwell on these issues. I think it is a good moment to pause and reflect on all that is positive about this announcement.

Rosales' announcement is the product of intense political negotiations that began several months ago. This process involved lengthy discussions between three main candidates, several less popular ones, and Venezuela's NGOs. The fact that these people could sit down, see the urgency of what is coming to us, understand that unity is of the utmost importance, and come up with a reasonable solution at the right time is an enormous step forward for the opposition. Long gone are the extensive deliberations of the extinct Coordinadora Democrática, where nothing was ever solved, nobody had the lead voice, there was no vision and the message was never clear.

Some people have expressed misgivings about Rosales being the product of negotiations and not the product of primaries. There are several reasons why this criticism rings a bit hollow:
a) It was well known that the organization of the primaries was facing numerous logistical problems;
b) enthusiasm for the primaries was dwindling;
c) voters were afraid of participating in the primaries and ending up in some government list where they would be punished;
d) Súmate was being distracted from its role by the government's continuous harassment; and
e) the primaries would have probably yielded a Rosales victory anyway.

The way that Rosales was selected is a positive development. It is possibly the first time that different factions in the opposition have sat down, discussed what the country needs and come up with a solution. It is a big step toward proving that the opposition is capable of governing Venezuela in spite of its heterogeneity.

It was also refreshing to see the way Teodoro Petkoff, Julio Borges and the rest of the candidates came out and supported Rosales. Special mention goes to Borges, who was Rosales' main challenger and who has immediately put his party's logistical and intellectual resources at his disposal. There are rumours Rosales will announce in the next few days that Borges will be his vice-president should he win, but the fact that Borges' support did not come with a quid pro quo is certainly positive for the future.

What does Rosales bring to the table? His two main assets are an efficient record as a public servant and two electoral victories over Chávez and his barrage of tricks. His record is evident in Zulia's improvements in roads and public services. Rosales has also shown political deftness, working with both the federal government and, especially, with Maracaibo's chavista mayor. All over Maracaibo, you see a healthy competition between the public works sponsored by city hall and the works sponsored by the governor (the competition reaches somewhat tacky levels, given the enormity of the colourful signs announcing this or that sidewalk is being brought to you by either the mayor or the governor).

Rosales has skilfully hung on to his job in spite of the CNE's tricks and opposition voter apathy. He is very popular in Zulia, and it is likely he will carry this state in the election, tricks or no tricks. Zulianos are Venezuela's most region-proud bunch, and we tend to be more pragmatic in our ideology. It's my impression that, as a whole, Zulianos seem to be less prone to left-wing populism. We believe in entrepreneurship and in private property more than the rest of the country, and we can be sure that Rosales will bring these issues to the table.

As for Rosales' proposals, we'll have more time to discuss these later. From what he has already said, they combine most of the proposals brought forward by Petkoff and Borges, including a direct mechanism to hand out oil rents and the improvement of the misiones. He has also come forward against the war-like mentality that seems to pervade in the government lately, even borrowing some of Rausseo's lines by saying that airplanes will be changed to schools and missiles will be changed to hospitals.

Finally, Rosales is the product of decentralization, a complex political process started in the late 80s that has not quite achieved as much as promised in spite of its popularity. Decentralization has come under attack from the current administration. Chávez, as all good military men, hates independent subordinates, and he has implemented numerous initiatives destined to take away what little power regional and local governments had. Rosales is sure to propose further decentralization as a way of bringing power back to the communities and the states.

As I said before, today is not a day to criticize. The opposition is showing great maturity in coming up with a concerted solution at this stage of the game. Let's wait and see what happens with other candidates such as Rausseo or Smith, as well as what AD decides to do. In the meantime, let's celebrate the hope of putting a zuliano in Miraflores for the first time in our history.

August 8, 2006

Holy bus drivers, Batman!


Katy says: Nicolás Maduro is apparently going to be named Foreign Secretary. Comments thread is now open...

August 7, 2006

Not Rosales, pleaaaase!

From the road, Quico says: I don't know that much about Manuel Rosales - in itself a bad sign, given what a political junkie I am - but here it goes all the same: I think the guy is hopeless as a candidate, worse even than Borges.

Here's why: There's one message that comes through loud and clear in all the public opinion research that's been done over the last few years: no volveran - they shall not return - is one chavista slogan that has legs. It's the one thing that chavistas and NiNis concur on, this deep seated disgust with the pre-Chavez political system. But it's a message Rosales seems not to get at all.

By all accounts, Rosales is a retread adeco. His discursive style is as much a throw-back to 70s style AD populism as is his political organization. Isn't it fair to presume that if the guy looks like an adeco, sounds like an adeco, smells like an adeco and talks like an adeco, voters will conclude he's an adeco?

His campaign launch line about Chavez's misiones being basically the same as the social programs of the pre-Chavez era underlines the basic problem with his whole approach: while, substantively, he may be right, the line catastrophically fails to realize the way Chavez's discourse of radical popular empowerment have changed the rules of the political game. As everyone knows, el pais cambio, ...everyone, that is, except for Manuel Rosales.

The key political fact is that even if the misiones are just souped-up social programs, they don't feel that way to their recipients. That makes all the difference, because in politics perceptions are realities. Chavismo has moved the goal-posts of Venezuelan politics not just by mobilizing oil resources for the poor, but by going all out to ensure that the poor feel that state resources are mobilized on their behalf. I just don't see how a politico who doesn't understand that has a chance in December.

People tell pollsters again and again that they want an alternative to chavismo that is, at the same time, an alternative to the legacy of puntofijismo. Rosales seems very far from being channelling that desire. As a candidate, I can't see how he could reach out beyond the traditional hardcore anti-chavez vote and win over the broad, politically homeless center that's so clearly the key to mounting a credible challenge in December. To say nothing of winning over wavering transactional chavistas.

So, we'd be stuck with the same 40% that keeps voting against Chavez - and that's a best case scenario, because we know many of them will abstain on principle.

This is not what the opposition needs. What the opposition needs is a candidate able to turn this race upside down, one able to innovate discursively, to mount an anti-Chavez discourse that is clearly, patently distinct from the pre-Chavez political tradition, that has a chance to make a serious bid for NiNi and wavering transactionals' votes. I don't think I need to spell this one out any further...

The accidental candidate


Katy says: Zulia Governor Manuel Rosales is in a bind. He is mulling whether to be or not to be the opposition's main presidential candidate. Many people consider Rosales somewhat of an enigma. A man of few words, he has managed to be an effective local governor without the benefit of traditional political alliances. However, the thing that says most about the presidential aspirations of this Zulian Hamlet, is the fact that this is a dilemma at all.

Rosales is in the position he thought he wanted. Polls show him leading (by a razor-thin margin) Julio Borges as the opposition's main hope. Teodoro Petkoff has cleared the race, and Borges himself has hinted that he is ready to work for Rosales should he decide he wants the banner. Rausseo has, so far, not become the overwhelming phenomenon that people feared he would. And yet Rosales still wonders.

Venezuela's Supreme Tribunal said a few days ago that Chávez would not have to resign in order to run for President, but that other public servants would. However, in yet another judicially obscure ruling, it seems some people are still doubtful whether or not Rosales would have to resign or simply detach himself from his Governorship temporarily. Rosales seems to have the faint hope that the government would let him go back to his governorship should he run for President and lose.

Rosales is now in the position of deciding whether he wants the Presidency enough to renounce everything he has achieved so far. The decision to run carries lots of risk: he risks losing control of the Zulia Governorship, losing the Presidency and, ultimately, losing his freedom because of the government's open case against him for signing the Carmona decree. And yet... the fact that he is mulling this issue when many cards are lined up in his favor says tons about his commitment to the cause, or lack thereof.

If he is still doubting, perhaps he doesn't want it badly. Perhaps he is an accidental candidate, someone who is called upon to fill the void but has never really had Miraflores as his goal. Perhaps Venezuelan voters deserve better. If he really is that scared to lose his governorship, perhaps he should step aside and let Borges be the candidate. At least we know he really wants it.

August 3, 2006

A closer look at fingerprinting machines


Katy says: Loyal reader and fellow blogger Bruni (I assume those are her eyes at left) has a great post today regarding the accuracy of fingerprint scanning machines used by Venezuela's CNE. I recommend it!

Here is the Spanish version, and here is The Devil's Excrement's English translation. Thanks to both!

August 2, 2006

Facts of the day

Katy says: Did you know that, according to Prof. Marino González of Simón Bolívar University, the total spending on weapons Chávez has announced in the last year and a half (more than US$3 billion) is equivalent to a year and a half's worth of the budget assigned to the Ministry of Health?

Did you know that, according to the same source, 57,607 children between the ages of 0 and 1 died between 1999 and 2004?

Did you know that roughly 80% of these deaths (or 46,086) were preventable?

46 thousand Venezuelan babies have died during this administration because their families lived in deplorable conditions. Their parents' education probably did not reach third grade. Their houses did not have basic services such as sewage or running water. Medical attention before or during childbirth was probably inadequate, and pediatric care was probably not available to them.

Of the 7,400 children between 0 and 1 who died in 2004, more than 2,000 of them died due to complications from childbirth, complications that could have been prevented with greater control during the pregnancy. 986 of these children died due to generalized infections, probably due to lack of access to antibiotics. 686 died due to diarrhea. 300 of these children died of infant malnutrition.

Will the primaries go the way of Jorge's Audi?



Katy says: Several things from the news this morning that are worth commenting.

1. If it's bad to be rich, Jorge Rodríguez is one baaaaad MFer. Former CNE President Jorge Rodríguez totalled his brand-new Audi yesterday. The circumstances of the crash are not yet clear. However, it is known that Mr. Rodríguez was giving a ride to one of José Vicente Rangel's staff members. It is also known that Rodríguez was in the process of starting a news program in Chávez's TV station, Telesur. And finally, Chávez's vice-minister (and Rodriguez's sister) Delcy Rodríguez claims privately-owned Clínica El Ávila refused to give Rodríguez treatment, something the Clinic denies. We wish Rodríguez a speedy recovery. We always enjoy his public appearances, specially because it reminds us that, contrary to what the Constitution says, he has never been impartial in the political debate. We also hope he can buy himself another car that 99.5% of the Venezuelan population could never afford. Go Jorge!

(side note: Rodríguez managed to smash into yet another Audi - imagine that, things are going so well in Venezuela, that there is no space on Caracas' streets for so many Audis)

2. Confusing signs regarding the Primaries. Despite Súmate saying that everything is A-OK with the primaries, Julio Borges is announcing for the first time that he has doubts about the procedure. Negotiations between Borges, Petkoff and Rosales are ongoing, but one wonders if the primaries have the momentum to be carried out. Whatever the outcome, let's hope the resulting candidacy brings together all forces fighting toward the same objective. Unidad!

August 1, 2006

Opinion Duel: Last Salvo

In the last salvo in our Opinion Duel on Benjamin Rausseo, Quico says that Katy makes her case as if chavismo had never happened.

The Duel is now complete. Read it all:
  1. Katy's opening post.
  2. Quico's reply
  3. Katy's counterargument
  4. Quico's retort.

July 31, 2006

We interrupt our debate...

Katy says: Fidel Castro is undergoing intestinal surgery and has handed over power to his brother.

Round two...

... has begun.

Katy says Quico is just another desperate blogger.

Stay tuned for Quico's response.

Conde del Guacharo Opinion Duel is on...

It has started.

Katy wrote there is no spoon for her in this sancocho.

Quico replies that Katy is giving a gift horse a root canal...

July 29, 2006

Throwing down the gauntlet...


Alright, Katy - if that is indeed your real name - things have gone far enough. I shall suffer your Guacharophobia in silence no more.

The time has come for an Opinion Duel.

Er Conde en Er Guachinton Pos

The Guachinton Pos picks up an AP story about Rausseo...
"He's ugly, I'm ugly ... I talk, he talks. But the difference is I live in Venezuela," he quipped, in a gibe at the frequent overseas travels of the Venezuelan leader, who has been on a three- continent tour since last week.

Rausseo, who is also a successful businessman with hotels and other enterprises, grew up poor and left school at 11 to support his family as a shoeshine boy, street vendor and taxi driver.

On Friday he told supporters that even if he cracks jokes on the campaign trail, he's serious about combatting crime, creating jobs, winning the trust of foreign investors and healing a divided nation.

July 27, 2006

The Sancocho Test

Ask yourself this: what drives people's voting in the TV age? Is it experience? "Preparation"? A government program? Ideology?

It's none of these things: in a media-saturated age, voting is driven by primal identification.

A generation ago, before media saturation had reached the extreme levels we see these days, voting was mediated by formal party structures built on long-standing allegiances. An adeco was an adeco hasta que se muera. Party identifications were passed down within the family from one generation to the next.

The rise of ubiquitous media, and the collapse of party affiliations, has dissolved these easy certainties. Today, the mediating structure between candidate and voter is no longer the political party, it's the TV camera. And the sense of intimacy TV creates sets up a whole series of new challenges for candidates, challenges that are more psychosocial than political.

In this reconfigured arena, a candidate needs to stir voters' primal identifications to compete. He needs to give people the sense - on some pre-rational, pre-verbal, entirely emotional, gut level - that he gets it, that he is like them, that they can feel comfortable with him because he understands them, and that he understands them because he has been through the same experiences they have been through.

One way to think about this ability to connect on a pre-rational, non-political level is the Sancocho Test. (OK, in the US, it's the Barbeque Test - but lets Venezuelanize it.) Gringo pollsters have taken to asking voters which candidate they would rather invite to a barbeque. Or which candidate they would rather drink a beer with. In one variant, they ask which candidate they would prefer to sit next to on a long flight.

These are powerful questions because they get straight to primal identification issues. They drive at the entirely apolitical sense of emotional comfort with the candidate that drives voting decisions in a media-saturated age. They explain why a barely literate recovering alcoholic and failed oil-man could beat two of the smartest, best prepared democratic pols in a generation: too many gringos couldn't begin to imagine themselves chatting with Al Gore over a burger or hanging out, beer in hand, with John Kerry.

Which, of course, is a roundabout way of explaining why I think El Conde del Guacharo is actually a pretty promising candidate. Because as a candidate you can say all the right things, but you can't BS your way past the Sancocho Test, and if you can't pass it, you're toast. (Hell, just ask Roberto Smith.)

Now, who do you think the average guy trying to sustain a family on one minimum wage and one misión scholarship in Acarigua, or Maturín, or La Vega would rather eat a sancocho with ? Petkoff, Borges, Rosales or Er Conde del Guacharo? It's simply not a contest.



And then, who do you think these guys would rather drink a beer with? Rausseo or Chavez? That's where this whole thing gets interesting...

July 26, 2006

The Schemel-Morris-Musipán Axis

...or: method to the madness.

As Condemania grips the nation, the question looms ever larger: who exactly is behind Benjamín Rausseo?

Frankly, I don't know. I do know who's polling for him: Oscar Schemel, of Hinterlaces, together with the Gringo Prince of Polling Darkness Dick Morris, the legendarily smarmy, ruthlessly effective DC-operative.

If so, Chavez has something to worry about: Morris is not a man to be messed with, and Oscar Schemel is an extremely savvy pollster in his own right. Schemel has spent years building the case that the only way to beat Chavez is to take a sharp turn away from politics as usual.

Just last week, he was telling IPS:
“The only candidate who can confront Chavez successfully with some sort of margin of success, according to this study, is an ‘outsider,’ someone outside of the current political scheme and who still has not emerged.”

In his opinion, an ample spectrum of the population, up to 49%, can be located in a “ni-ni” (neither-nor) space, since they like neither Chavez nor the opposition. Among the other half of the country, 33% is clearly Chavista and 16% is oppositional.

Schemel said that in his research the population transfers to a hypothetical leader strengths that encapsulate their values, such as that he be young, humble, comes from below and has suffered, that he has a concrete governing program and is not part of any political extremes.
Is this ringing any bells yet?

For years Schemel has been arguing that the Chavez era has produced deep changes in Venezuela's political culture and that the opposition got stuck fighting the last war. Schemel has argued to anyone who will listen that perceptions of the Traditional Opposition political class were so overwhelmingly negative, no challenge from the existing cohort could have a chance against Chavez. His polling bears this out clearly:

Click to enlarge.

And so, for years, Oscar Schemel has been out hunting for an outsider able to take the fight to Chavez in a way no traditional pol possibly could.

Last year he argued:
A new culture is emerging, and it's resignifying and deactivating our received ideas about politics, amidst a social and symbolic struggle to redefine democracy, development and social relations.

The current political struggle is chiefly over interpretations and meanings. While the elites and the middle class fight to impose their own notions about democracy and citizenship, the poor majority, chavista and non-chavista, is refuting and resignifying those same ideas.

While chavismo has an important influence on the new interpretation that arises from this unprecedented political experience of the excluded, it is far from imposing its hegemony as a shared vision able to bring together the different interests of Venezuelan society.

The challenge is to build a new hegemony based on the demands of the majority for reconciliation, unity, equality, efficiency and new leaderships.
Seen in the context of Schemel's longer-term vision, the Conde del Guacharo experiment makes perfect sense. Benjamín Rausseo incarnates all the characteristic of the Perfect Oppo Candidate Schemel's research shows people are looking for:

Click to enlarge


Rausseo seems to be Schemel's answer to the question of how to launch a radical symbolic contestation of chavismo that has legs in the population at large. How to fight back effectively at Chavez's attempt to impose a new definition of Democracy in Venezuela.

The perfect outsider to unleash the perfect electoral storm.

Can he pull it off?

Amanecerá y veremos...

July 25, 2006

Anti-politics taken to its logical conclusion...

Well, it had to come to this: Benjamín Rausseo, much better known as El Conde del Guacharo, has launched his presidential bid.

It's a bit of a challenge to explain who Mr. Rausseo is to foreign readers. Basically, he's a stand-up comedian who long ago launched a wildly successful, unabashedly ribald act as "El Conde del Guacharo" - a fast talking, obscenity-spewing, tell-it-like-it-is everyman from Oriente. Love his comedy or hate it, Er Conde is just about as far from a traditional politician as it's possible to imagine.

Not surprisingly, the question that dogs Rausseo at this stage is whether he is, you know, actually serious about this. It sure seems like he is: wearing a suit, making a gargantuan effort to contain the stream of utter obscenity that is the cornerstone of his comedy act, and fielding questions (mostly) seriously, he's making every effort to convey that this is not a joke.

Alarmingly, Rausseo seems to be the most talented campaigner the opposition has come up with so far. Making the most of his humble begginings, but also wasting no opportunity to talk about his successful career in business (the guy built and owns a Theme Park in Margarita,) his soon-to-be-earned law degree and his polyglotal abilities, Er Conde is packaging himself as the no-nonsense alternative to Chavez. He's the one opposition guy able to talk to regular Venezuelans in a language they can understand, able to level with them without condescending or patronizing, and able to stake out a dissident position that's solidly grounded in good old, popular common sense. When it comes to connecting with regular people on a gut level, he's just light-years ahead of Borges, Petkoff and Rosales...which is not surprising, since connecting with regular people on a gut level has been his job for 20 years.

Can his candidacy attain the Electoral Tsunami status he aspires to? Only time will tell. For now, I'll just note that his strategic positioning is excellent. Rausseo is selling himself with Roberto Smithesque marketing savvy, but without Smith's hoity-toity East-side-Caracas-via-Harvard baggage. His pitch is solidly centered on Chavez's polling weak points ("se acabó la regaladera de plata! primero los de acá, los demás que se pongan en fila!") and what he lacks in experience he more than makes up in charm, street cred, and chispa.

Other positives? Absolutely everyone knows who El Conde del Guacharo is - and almost everyone seems to like him: he is one candidate with no name-recognition problems, and low negatives. Moreover, he is one guy Chavez just can't run his usual playbook on: Rausseo's outsider aura and popular touch makes him the only candidate with a real chance to out-Chavez-Chavez, to out-feel people's pain, and to out-flank any personal attack. Actually, with his legendary, acerbic wit, trying to attack him would be a distinctly risky proposition for Chavez...who else could bitch-slap the guy the way El Conde could?

Remember how people said Teodoro was a good candidate because Chavez could not credibly dick him around? Well, it turned out that Chavez didn't have to dick him around, because Teodoro is such a hopeless campaigner Chavez can just ignore him. Rausseo, though, is the real thing: a guy who can't be ignored and can't (safely) be attacked.

It's amazing, alarming, depressing, just plain sad that it's come to this, but...I'm sort of excited about it.

[Rausseo's Globovision appearance is here. His campaign website is here.]

Housekeeping Note: New Subscription Software

Those of you who've used the "subscribe" thingy to get Caracas Chronicles delivered to your inbox know that the software I was using, Bloglet, was an unreliable piece of junk.

Today, I switched over to FeedBlitz, which I'm told is substantially better. The formatting on the emailed posts should be much prettier, and the service much more reliable.

Those of you who were already subscribed with the old system don't need to do anything: I already migrated your subscriptions over to the new system. Those of you who weren't subscribed might want to give it a try. Takes two minutes.

Just enter your email, then follow the directions on the screen:




July 24, 2006

Skypecast: Jonathan DiJohn Casts Doubt on the Resource Curse

Click here to listen to the interview.

In the second Skypecast in a series on Venezuela's economic collapse, I interview Jonathan DiJohn. Dr. DiJohn is a lecturer in Political Economy and Development Studies at the University of London, and a former visiting researcher at IESA.

His explanation of Venezuela's economic collapse presents a challenge to the conventional academic wisdom on the subject. Arguing that "resource curse" arguments that highlight the role of oil can't account for Venezuela's growth collapse, Dr. DiJohn focuses instead on the shift to a "Big Push", heavy industry-led development strategy implemented in the 1970s - what we think of as La Gran Venezuela - and argues this type of import-substitution industrialization plan was incompatible with the country's increasingly fragmented and populist political system. Oil, in general, plays a minor role in an explanation that highlights the mismatch between political system and economic strategy starting in 1973.

You can download an early draft of Dr. DiJohn's paper in MS Word format here.

The 40-minute Skypecast is, once again, a non-technical review of his research that I hope will be understandable to non-specialists. I thought the interview was really interesting, but you tell me what you think: Click here to listen to the interview.

If you like what you hear, you're in luck: Dr. DiJohn will publish a book on the history of Venezuela's Development Strategy next year.

Hugo's Axis of Evil 2006 World Tour: Enough Rope to Hang Himself With

Ah, the harvest of incriminating quotes has begun. Here's Huguito on Belarus:

"I have come here to conclude a unity pact. Here we see a model of the social state that we are beginning to create."
"Here, I've got a new friend and together we'll form a team, a go-ahead team," Chavez said before one-on-one talks. "I thank you, Alexander, for solidarity and we've come here to demonstrate our solidarity."

Lukashenko, an open admirer of the Soviet Union, returned the praise, calling the president of the world's fifth-largest oil exporter "a man of extensive knowledge."

"You are versed not only in the economy of Venezuela but in the Belarus economy, as well. You know military science, the military-industrial complex, and this impresses me very much," he said. "We have many directions for cooperation. There are no closed topics for discussions in our cooperation with Venezuela."

During the 24-hour visit, Chavez was slated to tour a military academy and the "Stalin Line" - a network of World War II-era defense installations restored by Lukashenko's government.

Do note, before retorting some variation on the old "Venezuela can seek diplomatic links with anyone it wants" line, that Chavez is specifically praising the state model in Belarus and explicitly noting the similarities between what they have and what he's beginning to create in Venezuela.

First reader to find me a picture of Chavez feeling up Lukashenko good enough to put on the right-hand column wins a lollypop.

July 23, 2006

Comparative Campaign Launches

Here's a study in contrasts:

Julio Borges launching PJ's Progreso Popular plan:



Teodoro Petkoff launching his candidacy



Manuel Rosales launching his campaign (unfortunately, audio only:)

Click here.

July 22, 2006

Making a buck, the North Korean Way

The current New York Times Magazine carries this stunning feature on North Korea's super-sophisticated operation to counterfeit US dollars:
According to defector accounts, Kim Jong Il endorsed counterfeiting not only as a way of paying for covert operations but also as a means of waging economic warfare against the United States, “a way to fight America, and screw up the American economic system,” as the North Korean specialist paraphrased it to me.

In a similar vein, according to Sheena Chestnut, a specialist on North Korea’s illicit activities who has also interviewed several key defectors, counterfeiting was seen as an expression of the guiding idea of the regime: the concept of juche. Often loosely translated as “self-reliance” or “sovereignty,” the idea of juche entails an aggressive repudiation of other nations’ sovereignty — a reaction to the many centuries in which Korea capitulated to its larger, more powerful neighbors. “It appears that counterfeiting actually contributed to the domestic legitimacy of the North Korean regime,” Chestnut told me. “It could be justified under the juche ideology and allowed the regime to advertise its anticapitalist, anti-American credentials.”

By 1984, as North Korea’s planned economy began to fall apart, Kim Jong Il, who by that time was effectively running much of the government, issued another directive, according to the North Korean specialist, who told me he has obtained a copy of the document. It explained that “producing and using counterfeit U.S. dollars” was a means, in part, for “overcoming economic crisis.” The economic crisis was twofold: not only the worsening conditions among the general population but also a growing financial discontent among the regime’s elite, who had come to expect certain perquisites of power. Counterfeiting offered the promise of raising hard currency to buy the elite the luxury items that they had come to expect: foreign-made cars, trips for their children, fine wine and cognac.
...
From all accounts, superb quality is a feature of much North Korean contraband: methamphetamine of extraordinarily high purity; counterfeit Viagra rumored to exceed the bona fide product in its potency; supernotes. It’s an impressive product line for a regime that can barely feed its people. When I discussed this with Asher, he let out a sigh. “I always say that if North Korea only produced conventional goods for export to the degree of quality and precision that they produce counterfeit United States currency, they would be a powerhouse like South Korea, not an industrial basket case.”

Better yet, read the whole thing - it's always good to be up to date on what Chavez's buddies are up to.

Like Caracas Chronicles, only funny...

In his inimitable style, Harry Hutton nails a point I've been trying to make for a long time. It's just that when he does it, you laugh...

July 21, 2006

The Paleopopulist Approach

Zulia Governor Manuel Rosales finally had a proper presidential campaign launch yesterday, giving a good old fashioned, nasal-toned populist speech to a crowd of fawning supporters at the Ateneo de Caracas.

His discourse is pleasingly focused on some Chavez weak points - particularly his wildly unpopular spending spree abroad - and largely ignores the kinds of abstract questions that rile up the Noticiero Digital crowd while leaving most voters cold. That's smart politics. On the other hand, he said nothing at all about Chavez's single most vulnerable issue: crime.

As for his style...well, I'm too much of a hoity-toity intellectual to openly say I like it. Charismatic he ain't, but when he gets going, and in front of an appreciative crowd, he does a passable impression of an old-style, rabble-rousing adeco. At times, the guy sounds like he's channeling Piñerúa. Could this kind of rhetoric do the trick?

Well, judge for yourself: the podcast of the speech is here.

July 20, 2006

Hugo's Axis of Evil 2006 World Tour: Dreamin' of Pyongyang and Propagandizin' of Beirut

Turns out Hugo Chávez still wants to go to North Korea, but Pyongyang seems to be playing hard to get. Could Kim Jong Il bear to sit around a table with an even bigger megalomaniac than him? We can only hope...GOD I want that picture!

Chávez also took the chance to reaffirm his "strategic brotherhood" (?!) with Iran and, obviously, to blame the US for the latest Middle East crisis. Certainly the American refusal to make even a ritual exhortation for peace is pretty appalling. But trying to pin the entire blame for this tragedy on one side or the other is plainly childish. The US is just about as guilty of this as Chávez, with his sophomore-leftie-style rant exonerating Hamas and Hezbollah of any responsibility at all for the war they conciously provoked and his failure to notice that the missiles that have been raining on the north of the Zionist Entit...erm, Israel are made in Tehran.

Faced with a complex diplomatic situation, Chavez's instincts are tiresomely predictable: find out the US position, then argue the diametrical opposite, whatever the facts. His blithe embrace of indefensible overstatements underlines the guy's basic irresponsibility: "it's the Israeli Army," he said, "that is bombing entire cities, a real genocide, how far this madness will go only God knows."

First of all, there's this "entire cities" business. The contrast between Israel's deliberate targetting of relevant military objectives and Hezbollah's perverse pride in the indiscriminate nature of its attacks is all too evident. With the Israeli Air Force dropping leaflets to warn civilians to evacuate areas they are about to strike, Chavez's suggestion that it's the Israeli campaign that is indiscriminate must count as a grotesque reversal.

Then there's the sheer indefensibility (not to mention extreme bad taste) of the "real genocide" line. So far, 300 Lebanese civilians have died in a week of air raids. That's 300 too many - but think of it this way: Lebanon has suffered 43 fatalities per day so far, and that's just about the same number of deaths we see in Venezuela on any given day, just from street crime. Venezuelan choros don't even need military weaponry to launch their own little tropical "genocide", but somehow that doesn't get Chavez's juices flowing...

Which brings us back to an old topic: the proof of the anti-semitic pudding is in the eating. Who Chavez thinks killed Christ is a side-show. The smoking gun is Chávez's active, ongoing, diplomatic and material support of a holocaust-denying regime that espouses an ideology laden with extreme, explicit anti-semitism and looks forward with glee to the destruction of the State of Israel, whether through proxies or nukes.

July 18, 2006

The Montonera of the 21st Century

It's a point GP keeps making in my comments section, and it's a good one: for most Chavez supporters abroad, Venezuela didn't exist before 1998. Brought into their consciousness more as a screen where revolutionary aspirations can be projected than as a real place, with a real history and a real people, Venezuela remains an abstraction in PSF minds. For this reason, international philochavismo fails again and again to understand the way developments in the Chavez era fit into the long sweep of Venezuelan history.

This is the reason I like articles like the one I linked to in yesterday's post. They show the much neglected element of continuity in a regime that ceaselessly trumpets its radical novelty.

The fascinating thing about the bolibourgeoisie is how closely its rise re-enacts a socio-political pattern that was already well established 150 years ago. Without an awareness of Venezuela's long history of assimilating new moneyed elites, it's impossible to know what to make of the Wilmer Rupertis and Arné Chacóns of the world.

Venezuela's 19th century was marked precisely by a quite similar dynamic. Central governments in Caracas had access to some tax and customs revenue, but never really consolidated control of the rest of the country. Periodically, regional caudillos would cobble together little private armies - montoneras - and attack Caracas. Once every few years, a montonera would succeed and establish a new "national" government. The sordid little war that brought about such regime change would typically be described as a "revolution" by its leaders.

The financiers and logisticians of the victorious montonera then got to cash in, by trafficking on their access to the new governing elite. They would adapt to the lifestyle and spending patterns of the old moneyed elite, and, if the new government lasted long enough before the next successful montonera, they would insinuate themselves gradually into the pre-existing oligarchy.

Sooner or later a new montonera would bring a new caudillo into power and the whole process would repeat itself.

The process stood in stark contrast with the pattern in countries like Peru and Guatemala, where oligarchies were genuinely closed to new members and new money could not buy access into the upper reaches of polite society. In Venezuela, the difference between a zambo and a catire has always been the size of his bank account.

The discovery of oil merely upped the ante in this little game, but didn't fundamentally change it. The AD trienio of 1945-48 didn't last long enough to establish a new moneyed elite, but the Pérez Jiménez era did, as did - much more profoundly - the Punto Fijo regime. War was replaced by elections as a method of choosing the new governing elite, but the tenor of the relationship between the new governing elites and their financiers and logisticians carried on more or less undisturbed.

These days, amid a discourse that obsessively emphasizes change, we see these old, old patterns re-enacted for the Nth time, as though something in our cultural DNA inexorably pushed our society into playing out the same script again and again.

Revolutionaries are everywhere and always blind to the way they renew the structures of the regimes and social systems they seek to replace.

But don't be fooled: not that much has changed. Just like in the 19th century, the new moneyed elite instinctively mimics the lifestyle of the old. Just like in the 19th century, it builds its fortune out of connections rather than producing anything of real value. Just as in the 19th century, it depends on an atmosphere where back-scratching, influence-peddling, rent-seeking and the mutual dependence of politicians and financiers determines your chances to get rich. And, just like in the 19th century, in time it will grow too fat and comfortable to defend itself, too openly putrefact to enlist anyone's loyalty, and it will fall.

July 17, 2006

Reporting the Bolibourgeoisie

The Miami Herald's Steven Dudley adds one more article to a fast growing subgenre of journalism about the Chavez era: The Bolibourgeoisie Color Piece. I think this one is more snazzily written than most, though:
They drive shiny new Hummers and Audis. They wear Cartier and carry Montblanc bags. They buy up luxury apartments and fly private aircraft to and from Miami. And they almost always pay in cash.

They are the so-called Boliburguesía -- short for Bolivarian bourgeoisie -- a reference to socialist President Hugo Chávez's declared ''Bolivarian'' revolution on behalf of Venezuela's poor.

Chávez has seen world oil prices go from $10 a barrel when he was first elected in 1998 to more than $70 today. He has used these windfall billions to finance dozens of social projects on behalf of the poor at home, and provide assistance to regional neighbors from Cuba to Argentina.

But the rising economic tide has not only lifted the poor's boats, bringing back memories of the 1970s, when another spike in oil prices sparked a free-spending boom. Businessmen agile enough to ally themselves with the government have caught the gravy train. Tops on this Boliburguesía list are men like Wilmer Ruperti, one of the few businessmen who supported the Chávez government during a crippling national strike in late 2002 demanding the president's resignation.

It's easy to see why journos find it easy to sell these pieces to editors back home: they're highly visual - all that talk of Hummers and Cartiers - and appealingly man-bites-doggish - who's ever heard of socialist revolutionaries ponying up for yatchs and things?

Personally, I like them because they highlight perhaps the key theme in the Chavez Era: contradiction. There are so many contradictions running through so many aspects of so much of what the government does it makes your headspin.

Bolibourgeoisie - the weird juxtaposition that makes up the neologism itself neatly captures the taste of the incongruities that run through the Chavez era. To my mind, any reporting that helps foreign readers get a feel for the scale of the gap between the official propaganda line and Venezuela's irreducibly complicated, usually contradictory reality is to be commended.

July 15, 2006

July 14, 2006

How to win with crime...

Crime is the issue Venezuelans are most worried about. It's also the issue where they rate Chavez's performance worst. Here's Keller's June 2006 Performance-by-Issue slide:

[Click to expand. Red=Problem is getting worse. Yellow = Problem is the same as ever. Blue = Problem is getting better.]

Somehow, though, the opposition can't get any traction on it. The problem is that, today, crime is just not a politicized issue. That's because Chavez just won't join the fray. The most amazing thing about Chávez's line on the crime epidemic is that he doesn't have one. And when the other side fails to acknowledge the issue, it's impossible to establish a discussion.

How does the opposition change this dynamic? It's tough. But one possible avenue is to talk about crime as a social and economic issue. This is something Tony Blair managed to do with his now famous "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" campaign line. By underlining the links between poverty, exclusion and urban violence, the opposition can use the sharp rise in crime to tell a story about the overall social failure of the regime - who's ever heard a country where rapid poverty abatement and social inclusion go hand in hand with an unprecedented crime wave? The story doesn't hang together.

The opposition badly needs to make the December election about its strongest issue. It needs to grab control of the agenda, something it's catastrophically failed to do since 2003. The protests surrounding the deaths of the Fadoul brothers showed that there's an substrate of anger around insecurity, that crime is politicizable. Time to move on this.

Venezuela's Murder Rate: Click here to expand

Addendum: Some of the crimes being reported these days are just jaw-dropping in their audacity. On Wednesday, at 5 a.m. in Guatire, a group of thugs held up fourteen buses in one go in a commando-style operation.

July 13, 2006

Making Crime Pay

From a polling perspective, it's a no-brainer. The issue most people identify as the country's biggest problem is also the one where they rate Chavez's performance the worst.

According to Hinterlaces' May/June 2006 poll, 87% of voters identify crime is the biggest problem in the country. 70% say crime has gotten worse under Chavez, and 24% say it's the same as it's always been.

Keller's June poll also identifies crime as the number one issue - 76% of his respondents think it's gotten worse and 15% say it's the same.

How should a savvy oppo candidate react?

By talking about very little else.

Chavista Assembly Members Demand Dissidents be Jailed

Pro-Chavez National Assembly Members José Albornoz (PPT) and Ismael García (Podemos) are asking the Prosecutor General to jail Sumate's leaders.

Their crimes? Usurping the CNE's prerogative by seeking to organize a primary election outside the state's control and incitement for publicly airing their views on CNE.

Still more proof that chavismo, as an ideology, has no room for the idea that some matters are not the state's business - that there are spaces where citizens can and should come to make decisions without the state's interference. We already saw this in 1999 when chavismo insisted that labor union elections had to be organized by CNE, and in 2003 when they said that signature-gatherings had to be run by CNE.

The notion that citizens can use whichever method they deem best to select their candidate for election is beyond them. The concept of civil society - of a sphere of social life that is both public and outside the state's control - is deeply alien to their understanding of the good society. By this reasoning, voting for Miss Venezuela will end up having to be organized by CNE.

Extremism? What extremism?

July 12, 2006

On the nature of verbal agression


Katy says: The debate that raged in the comments section (see Quico's prior post and the discussion that followed) got me thinking about the power of words. The right words said in the right context, be they Chávez's, Quico's, Alek Boyd's or Materazzi's, can be a powerful tool. They can inspire fear, apprehension, ridicule. They can send people into a tizzy, or send them straight to the nearest airport or locker room. They can provoke a reasonable, inspired response, or they can provoke an act of violence tinged with just the right amount of honor.

But I'm not a good enough writer to talk about these things. Here's what tennis writer/blogger Peter Bodo had to say about Zidane's infamous head-butt. I think there's some truth in there for all of us.

"What Zidane did was undoubtedly stupid. It was silly. It may have cost France a most magically earned World Cup championship, and it cost Zidane himself a fair amount of the glow surrounding his name.

But I also think this: Zidane was driven to butt Italian Marco Materazzi out of a sense of personal honor (you certainly can’t say Zidane acted in the heat of the moment), because Materazzi crossed a line in the sand. And that notion of “honor” is almost entirely gone from our collective life these days.

Theoretically, we should be living in a time of civility and harmony, because we’ve managed to create powerful prohibitions against things like the good old-fashioned punch-in-the-nose. Actually, it appears that we’ve thrown open the floodgates on incivility, reckless accusation (and lying), the vilest kinds of name-calling, bigotry - the whole nine – because nobody is held accountable anymore. Therefore, a guy like Materazzi (I'm basing all this on admittedly unsatisfying press reports) feels he can say anything he wants - Zidane wouldn't dare hold him accountable. Not with millions watching! Not with all that money at stake! Not with the precious World Cup trophy on the line!

But every once in a while, somebody – today, it’s Zidane - violates the taboo. He or she in effect, says, I don’t care what is on the line, how much money or personal advantage or reward. I am not going to have the last laugh, or laugh all the way to the bank. My code of honor simply won’t allow me to let this go unanswered. It takes an individual of great (if not necessarily admirable) character to take that road, and wasn’t Mr. Materazzi surprised to learn, in the most direct manner, that he was being held accountable for his words?

I don't expect many of you to agree with me on this. But I can't deny the way I feel about this. Of course, a part of me feels badly for the French squad, which inadvertently suffered because of what Zidane felt he had to do. But a part of me condones what Zidane did and forgives him because, in addition to striking a blow for accountability, his action also demonstrated something that many people forget and that as a writer I feel strongly about: words are powerful weapons, they can cause more hurt and sorrow than fists or belts or willow switches.

...

The head butt was about the power of words, the notion of accountability, and about honor. It was not an admirable move, nor a clever or practical one; it was something that transcended those mundane considerations."

July 11, 2006

Chavista Extremism: Scarier and scarier...

Extremism is becoming the defining characteristic of the chavista movement. At no point does the ruling ideology draw the line - just the opposite: every part of the new elite seems to operate under the maxim that if a little extremism is good, a lot is better. The result is a kind of tournament within the regime, a dynamic of one-upmanship where each tries to out-extremist the other.

It's a scary thing: the phrase "that's going too far" doesn't seem to be a part of the regime's political lexicon. More and more, the regime has lost its feel for the ridiculous (el sentido del ridículo) - leaving it shorn of any way to judge how much is too much.

Examples? They're a dime a dozen. Here are a few:
The point, I think, is clear: with the government firmly consolidated in power, all restraints on extremism have been lifted. The question then becomes: where does this road lead?

We need to be clear about this: Venezuela is not a totalitarian regime. But we also need to be clear about this: it is moving more and more decisively in that direction. Clearly, spaces for dissent still exist; just as clearly, the regime is working to close them down.

What's terrifying is that there is no logical limit to chavismo's power ambition. Nothing in the structure of the belief system limits its tendency to expand control into new areas of political and - more and more - social life.

There is no room in chavista thinking for the notion that some of spheres of human activity are and ought to remain outside of the political sphere. And there is certainly no space in chavista thinking for the notion that any part of the political sphere ought to remain outside the state's control. It's a way of conceiving politics that never says "enough," that has no notion of "that's not the state's business," that never sees a reason to stop expanding its reach, and that does not recognize any distinctions between the concepts of "nation", "state", "government", "party" and "Chavez." As far as the ruling ideology is concerned, to be for one of those is to be for all of them; to oppose one is to oppose them all.

What's scary is not so much where we are now, but where the internal logic of chavista thinking points us. These days people are happy buying their hummers and plasma TVs and such. But the logic of blanket politization is afoot, and with it the mechanisms first for authoritarian and later for totalitarian control.

We're definitely not there. Chavismo's myriad internal contradictions might yet cause its collapse before we get there. But it's not really possible to deny that we're heading there. Not any more.