The Devil's Excrement

Returning to Venezuela after three weeks of traveling, I find that very little has changed since I left. The scandals, stupidity and headlines seem to be variations of the same theme. After all, how much proof do we need that Chavez and his cronies are simply involved in an ideological project with no content and whose only objective is control of the country without benefiting the population in the name of socialism?

The headlines from abroad tells us that the data contained in Reyes’ computer proves that Chavez had a close relationship with the FARC. Is there a surprise there? Only the imbecile cheerleaders of the revolution still try to claim the data is false. One really does not need much proof to know how tight Chavez was and is with the FARC. Have people forgotten the FARC’s Foreign Minister Rodrigo Granda? Granda lived in Venezuela under a different name in total opulence, using papers provided to him by the Chavez Government. He even registered to vote! And when he first came to Venezuela he was provided full VIP protocol service at the airport, ordered by none other than the current Minister of the Interior. If Huguito disagreed with this actions, why was Chacin, who also had a second identity a turbulent past and a few million dollars under his name when he left the Ministry, brought back to the position last year?

And it was Chacin that was caught live during the hstage handover calling the FARC guerrillas “comrades” and telling them to keep it up, “we support your fight”. And Chavez did all but cry when he found out that Raul Reues had been killed, calling him a hero and the like.

And then of course, people seem to have forgotten that General Gonzalez Gonzalez fall out of favor with Chavez came about when he told Chavez about the FARC camps within the borders of Venezuela and Chavez did nothing. Did we really need to know more?

The material found in Reyes’ camp simply confirms the details and it has provided data that has led to arrests and captures, so it is absolutely idiotic to even suggest the data was faked by the CIA. If you argue that, you have to suggest that the presence of FARC leader Ivan Marquez at the Miraflores Palace, a man wanted internationally for murder, drug trafficking and terrorists acts, was also a CIA plot, which would then imply Chavez is CIA, as absurd a suggestion as saying FARC has not helped the FARC and has no ties to them.

Meanwhile, the members of the Electoral Board CNE, none of which are lawyers, do not even consult with their legal counsel to rule 4-1 that all decisions by the comptroller finding wrongdoing by an Government official, bans them from running in the regional elections. What a great tool! A person appointed by you single handedly decides there are crimes without a court mediating in the process and bans anyone the Government from running. Never mind that the Constitution says otherwise. But who gives a damn about the Constitution anyway. Mugabe would be proud of them, he never thought of doing something like that!

And then there is Hugo going to Court against his former wife claiming that he is not given the proper rights to be with his daughter. Never mind that he does not pay the alimony established by the Court or that he has had more important things to do on significant days for the same daughter, he has to make the point that his ex-wife can not oppose him. After all, which Court will rule against Chavez in a country where women are always favored in these cases? He is after all, the archetypical irresponsible Venezuelan father.

And as Chavez decreed the nationalization of Sidor, a majority of the country went dark in a clear indication of the inability of the Government to even sustain functioning institutions. But did Chavez get the message? No way, he is not a thinking person just a rabid ideologue.

And the Government sold US$ 4 billion to lower the parallel swap rate, which moved down a bit, but the country’s bonds moved even more as foreign investors are wary of Venezuela’s risk, even with oil at US$ 120. It makes no sense for the country’s bonds to yield close to 11% for the long term issues or even more ridiculous, the 2010 issue which yields close to 9%. Public employees got a 30% minimum salary increase which will cost in the words of the Minister of Planning only 3 percentage points of inflation. Sure, this money will have no impact on the swap exchange rate as more money flows into the economy. But Minister El Troudi is no economist, as it should be, given the disregard for economic principles by the revolution.

And it was no surprise what happened at Venezuela’s largest University, Universidad Central. There were four candidates, only one pro-Government, the winner got about 2,000 votes, while the Chavista candidate, who was born a revolutionary under the name Lenin, got 531 votes, down from about 600 when Minister Merentes ran in 2002. Incredible from a University that cheered Chavez’ victory in 1998.

And Chavez and his Minister of Defense denounced the secessionist movements that want Zulia state to split from Venezuela much like Santa Cruz voted last Sunday. Except that no one has been able to find what the proposal is, who is making it and who supports it. It must be an ultrasecret CIA movement.

Which shows that not much canged in the last three weeks in Venezuela…which is unusual when I travel…

While I like to limit the subject matter of my posts in this blog to Venezuela, on very special occasions I digress, but this post is likely to be one of the biggest departure from the focus of this blog. I just spent three remarkable weeks traveling through China and somehow I feel not only the need to put together my thoughts, but it also seems fitting to tell you about it in view of the large differences between what is going on in Venezuela and what is happening in China from both a political, social and economic point of view.

I visited China twenty-two years ago in 1986 when I went to a conference and I wanted to go back and see the changes that I have read so much about. I have actually followed quite closely a lot of what is happening there, but even then nothing prepared me for what I saw and I am still trying to understand and digest it all. Three weeks barely gives you time to understand a country as complex as China, which is undergoing such a massive transformation in all aspects of its life, but I will try to give you my own biased and superficial description of what I saw in that fascinating country.

China is certainly a quirky country, full of contradictions and contrasts. I visited some major cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Xian, but also visited what may be a tiny city there, the picturesque town of Guilin in the south, as well as numerous towns and cities along the Yangtze river, where I spent four days, including Fulin, Fengdu, Yichang and Chongqing, the last one having a population in its metropolitan area of 32 million people, more than all of Venezuela. Thus, I saw the remarkable metropolis that Shanghai has become, the elegant beauty of Beijing, but I also saw life in rural areas and the transformation caused by the gigantic Three Gorges Dam, which will be completed later this year.

I barely recognized Beijing or Xian, the two cities I visited in 1986. The transformation has been simply staggering. If it were not for the historical monuments, such as Tian An Me or the Forbidden Palace, it would have been hard to say I had been there earlier.

The forces unleashed by Den Xiao Ping on the Chinese economy are remarkable. From what I understood, there are two features that dominate the new China: the conversion to a market economy and the decision to give regions a lot of independence in what they can do and their planning. While certain issues are still decided in Beijing, provinces and municipalities function essentially independently, raising funds through real state “sales” (land is owned by the Government, so they are truly selling only 70 year leases) and taxes and using the money for their own local infrastructure projects.

What is most impacting is how rational and pragmatic the process is. Local authorities hire the best and are not second-guessed by the central Government. The orders are to be fairly pragmatic and empty of ideology. Simply put the people should improve their lives. And market polices dominate the how it is done, as simple as that. Wealth is seeing as something good in the belief that it will trickle down. Differences between top and bottom do remain huge.

The “best” rule through a complex process by which only the best and brightest are able to go to the University (11% of those eligible are accepted in a very competitive system for university posts) and the Communist party attracts the best from those that graduate. But beyond that, the Chinese also have an incredible work ethic. Students have hours that would seem absurd anywhere in the West, starting classes early in the morning and ending late at night. At river town Yichang, the best school in the city starts at 7 AM and ends at 10 PM, as students stay to do their homework. Similarly, students make sure they do their weekend homework early, so as to be able to attend the “special” classes, special activities and training required if you want to get ahead.

While one hears about the large-scale projects taking place in China, what impressed me the most is how infrastructure, both roads and housing has been the priority everywhere in the belief that good infrastructure leads to economic prosperity. It was clearly impressive to see the effort in relocating 1.2 million people along the Yangtze riverbanks, but it was more impressive to see the roads everywhere, the huge high rises, the airports, the power plants, which were everywhere. If in the peak of the housing boom in Spain the crane was jokingly said to have become the national tree, then in China I saw forests of them.

Of course a lot of this infrastructure building is only possible because labor is very cheap, allowing architects and designers to create projects that would be prohibitively expensive anywhere else. We did see housing built in the late eighties and early nineties that looked poorly built, already aging and with problems. But overall quality seems to be improving. Curiously, when you get or buy an apartment, you get no plumbing, air conditioner, appliances, toilets and even wiring. This leads to huge high rises with hundreds of exterior air conditioners, which create rain in the summer as they drip.

But there was also cleanliness and a level go hygiene that was not present 22 years ago. There has been a very direct campaign at the grassroots level to improve habits. The cities are clean, sadly, cleaner than Venezuela now. Running water is everywhere, which was not the case 20 years ago. I am not sure how it was done, other than I heard subsidies in which the Government would help pay certain expenses for improving hoes, but they were always shared with homeowners.

The economy is incredibly free. The Government controls certain things, but is always looking to liberate them. State owned companies go public almost daily, giving managers the mandate to make running them more open and always with profit in mind. The financial system seems a little bit obscure in how it functions, but even in that area the Government is opening up to foreign competition.

There seems to be corruption at the Government level, but there are also examples that while the Government is allowing some officials to make some money, there is a limit to excesses. One of the Shanghai officials that successfully led to the renovation of certain parts of the city is in jail for 16 years, he was just too obvious.

The scale of developments is simply beyond anything I ever expected and I have been a China believer for some time. But it is one thing to read about it an another to see it. How do you explain Shanghai going from 20 to 2,000 skyscrapers in 20 years? Or Beijing going from 85,000 cars in 1986 when I was last there to 3.5 million today? Or that sometime in the next four years China’s per capita income will exceed Venezuela’s, but they do not depend on oil? Or China’s GDP exceeding that of the US before 2030?

Those are massive changes and they have been achieved in a period of time unparalleled by anyone in history.

More importantly, China has now a modern infrastructure, something that the US or Europeans countries can’t boast they have. I thought of that as I crossed Frankfurt’s airport, full of long and somewhat dreary corridors and compared them to Beijingss brand new incredible airport or Shanghais new airport terminals. Even small cities have brand new pretty airports that would put Maiquetia to shame.

Family life is very special. The old live for the young and the one-child policies have emphasized that even more. The whole of family life is centered upon improving the kid’s life, sacrificing everything along the way. People express their love for the young in ways the West does not do. Basically, the sacrifices and efforts end only at death and go as far as leaving apart from the kids. Nothing is too small to guarantee the future of the kids. The children from the one-child only era, have become in their own words “Little Emperors”, pampered to death, but at the same time subjected to incredible pressures to succeed.

In my way, China is still divided in two by class an
d family. By class, because despite the remarkable progress, 60% of the population remains rural and largely poor, while the rest is prosperous and lives in the cities. Similarly, there is a division by age, the young have accepted and embraced the changes and the challenges, while the old still may have misgivings. Life for the old was simple and most things used to be guaranteed. The system was unfair, but everyone understood it. Now too many things are changing, individual imitative is the key, but the fear of uncertainty permeates their thinking.

But neither group questions what is happening. For the old, the great leap forward and the Cultural Revolution were policies they backed and they simply failed. For the young, they were events to be understood and analyzed, but neither group wants to see it from a critical point of view. Both Mao and Ping have an almost deity status, together with Dr. Sun Yat Sen, the founder of the Chinese Republic in 1919. No matter how much I asked, I found little criticism of either of them.

A prosperous and enterprising 74 year old lady living in a town in the Yangtze, who is doing today much better than twenty years ago (she has a new apartment and three stores), skirted gracefully my question as to who her preferred leader was by saying that all of them, whether Mao or Ping, made positive contributions and tried different things for the “people” and while some failed, other succeeded in making things better and that is what is important. I got similar answers everywhere as I tried to get some criticism of Mao, but failed to so.

Of course, the Chinese people have been repressed and controlled in the way they think for a long time and what they have today is simple a continuation of those policies. The state controls the media and all of the news flow. There is guidelines and censorship. Most Chinese only heard of the killing of ethnic Han Chinese in Tibet, but have heard nothing of the killings in reaction to that. Most of them have heard the Government’s story that Tibet has always been part of China, ignoring 700 years of independence up to 1951. Thus, what is big news in the West seems irrelevant and puzzling to most Chinese.

Because in the end the Chinese are extremely nationalistic and proud. To them the Olympics is something, which is not only a priority, but it should have taken place in China long ago, to show the progress their country has made. They feel they were short changed in earlier picks for Olympic cities. Any interference with that has to be politically motivated.

Curiously, the Chinese seem to feel more sympathetic to the US than to Europeans, as the former have never occupied China and even helped the country in the war with the Japanese. The Japanese clearly do not occupy a very favorable status for most Chinese. I learned early in my trip that any praise for anything Japanese would be met with a negative or at least skeptical reaction and I even used it as bait when it seemed obvious that I would extract some sort of reaction.

I did try to probe on freedom of speech issues everywhere and was always met with the same response: “Yes, we have some limitations, but things are improving all the time”. It may be true, but the Government still exerts total control over the media.

Twenty years ago, sex was taboo and public displays of affections were a no, no. Today the young enjoy levels of freedom and openness unheard of before. They joke of an MBA meaning Married But Available and people live together before marrying in the big cities, even if mothers to dominate the kids lives, having they marry before a certain age and demanding prior approval of the perspective partners. Mothers seem to be truly overbearing in China, even after the recent changes.

Freedom of speech limitations are always scary, but there were less scary than twenty years ago. It is illegal to have satellite dishes that receive foreign signals, but some have them. The Internet is indeed censored and you can read the English paper and know it was written by the Government. But the Chinese know more about the world than they used to do and books and magazines are not censored the way they used to be.

Movement is also freer. When I was there in 1986, I could not go everywhere, neither could the Chinese. Today we both can roam essentially everywhere, the magnitude of internal Chinese tourism is staggering and migrations to the cities is such that an estimated 170 million people have move to the cities in the last two decades. How is that for scale?

I was actually more bothered by the issues of sexism, racism and classism more than others. Women are not only discriminated against but even the one-child policies today, give a remarkable strong preference to males over females. Similarly, there is a strong deference and preference paid to the rich and Government officials everywhere. The latter live in special compounds and have all sorts of privileges.

Racism is also present and there are clear policies to deal with it despite words to the contrary. Tibet may be part of China, but the new Tibetan railroad is being used to “export” Han Chinese to the area to dominate the Tibetan population, while the natural resources are used to develop the rest of China.

Finally there is the environment. It can get very bad. Chongqing was absolutely awful! Beijing was not better, except that it rained hard while I was there clearing the air significantly, I can honestly say that I did not see blue skies in the three weeks I was there and was bothered by pollution in at least two cities. The Government seems to be talking a lot about the environment but doing very little. It was on this issue that I heard the most criticism of all, including the negative possible effects of the Three Gorge Dam, which leads me to think that the Government itself may be promoting these protests as an excuse to attack these issues and have the population rally around protecting the environment.

But all in all, it was a very positive impression that I got from China, their slope is positive for most basic issues, including human rights. Here is a Government using all of its resources to improve the well being of its people, while at the same time maximizing foreign investment to help it improve the impact even further. It is a revolution, but based on the individual, rather than the collective (They tried that and failed!) It is a belief that the entrepreneurship of the individual will overwhelm state policies to the point that economic sectors that are liberalized become a free for all as there are no anti-monopoly rules except in sectors still under control by the Government. I never saw so many cell phone stores in my life!

It is indeed a belief in Deng Tsiao Ping’s famous “To be rich is glorious” that will expand and trickle down to the people. Combine that with decades of Government domination with very hard working people and you get an incredible miracle.

At times I worried that those same forces could be turned around and the whole process be reversed in the presence of an external threat. That certainly seems like a real possibility, but at the same time, the young have now lived for twenty years under this new system and have seen the improvements. I am not sure they can be turned off from on day to the next unless the threat was real.

In fact, if I were a Chinese Government official, I would worry about how these young people will react the day things slow down, or if the environment continues to deteriorate or more political freedom is not given to them. In the end, the Government has to continue on the positive slope on all fronts for people to be happy. Media control may one day allow the Government to turn the people in the face of an external threat. But in the long run, it will be internal development that will determine how the Chinese future plays out.
Right now, it looks very good.

Today’s blackout may simply be showing the dark future awaiting us…

Miguel from the Yangtze River

You can’t help but be awed by the growth of China in the last three decades. I was here twenty-two years ago and the changes are simply staggering. You hear and read mostly about the great modern infrastructure projects of China, such as the building of a whole city of modern skyscrapers in the Pudong region of Shanghai, which now has more tall buildings that New York, or the Three Gorge Dam project, where I am today. But the basic infrastructure is what has impressed me more.

In small towns like Guilin in the South, right north of Vietnam, or in Yichang along the Yangtze River, cities you may have never heard of, the highways, schools, buildings and airports have nothing to envy the best and now old infrastructure of Venezuela. In fact, it is us that should envy that infrastructure, each and every one of the airports, for example, was as modern as the Maiquetia airport. And secondary highways near the small cities I mentioned are in better shape and better maintained that Venezuela’s main highway, the Autopista Regional del Centro.

All of this infrastructure requires planning and money. What is perhaps most interesting about the planning part is that in many cases, these highways were the first things to go in, even before housing was built. Of course, by now the Chinese have lots of experience in large scale planning such as the relocating of 1.4 million inhabitants along the Yangtze River or moving a few million people from the old residential areas of Shanghai to new housing.

Which leads me to the initial question of this post: What could you do with US$ 5 billion in Venezuela, if you spent it in infrastructure projects. The question comes up, because that is precisely the amount President Chavez will be spending on buying out the cement companies and steel company Sidor.  It is not a moot question, the nationalization of these well functioning companies is being done at the expense of using the funds in new infrastructure to benefit the population, rather than power grabbing, ideological projects with no added value to the “people”.

Let’s take for example housing. Chavez has been in power nine years and in not one of them has he been able to match the lowest number achieved by the Caldera II administration in any year, despite the much lower income of those lean years.

A small apartment 80 squared meters is sold on Venezuela for Bs. 60 million. This is roughly US$ 28,000 at the official rate of exchange, which is the only one the Government recognizes. Thus, with US$ 5 billion, if you spent it all on housing, you could build 185,000 apartments, which is probably an underestimate, given that the Government would not have to buy the land to build them and I am likely overestimating the cost, since my assumptions give you a cost per square meter 350 dollars per squared meter, which is high for low income housing. But in any case, the Chavez administration has yet to exceed half that number in any given year.

Or take hospitals. I don’t know what a hospital costs, but I know somebody building a hotel In Caracas told me that each room costs US$ 4,500 per square meter, including all costs.  So, suppose we build a 200-bed hospital with 6×4 meter two bedroom rooms. This means that you have to spend some US$ 21.6 million for the rooms. Since it is a hospital and you need equipment like surgery rooms, MRI and the like, I will throw in another US$ 20 million for the rest of the infrastructure or US$ 41.6 million per 200 bed hospital. Which means you could build at least 120 200 bed hospitals with this money. Quite a few for a Government that can’t even maintain the existing ones, let alone having built a single one in nine years. (Even failed Presidential candidate Rosales has built a couple)

I am on a boat in the Yangtze, there is actually an Internet connection, but it is less than modem speed, so I don’t know how much it would cost to build a mile of highway, but maybe some reader can enlighten us.

In any case, the point is that you could do so much with US$ 5 billion for the people. The Chinese with all the quirks of their system that I am still trying to digest have proven it over and over, as I see town after town that has been built from scratch along the shores of this magnificent river. But they have also understood the power of free enterprise and markets and how when you combine the two, everything investment gets magnified for the benefit of the people.

Just the opposite of what Chavez believes in.

But in the end it takes more than money to get things done. You need money, but also management capability and the ability to dream, not dream fantasies of power and grand epic gestures, but real concrete accomplishments for the people.

As I saw the Three Gorges Dam this morning, a US$ 25 billion project, I was reminded that Venezuela has the Guri dam, the fourth largest dam in the world, finished 38 years ago. Guri was conceived, designed and completely built by year 22^nd. of the now much maligned and despised Fourth Republic. At the rate we are going, one day that Republic’s revindication will be absolute.

Chávez has a dilemma: he needs a wife.

Naomi Campbell or Pilar Córdoba won’t do because he needs a Venezuelan wife.

By Venezuelan, I mean really Venezuelan, someone that was born in Venezuela, speaks Venezuelan and looks Venezuelan. She also has to be at least thirty years old and cannot have a second nationality.

It is not me who is saying this, it is the Venezuelan Constitution.

No, the Constitution does not say anything about the President’s wife, but it does say something about who can be the President of Venezuela.

That’s right:  Chávez needs a wife to propose her as the candidate for the Presidency of Venezuela in 2013. That would fix all his problems with the Constitutional Reform.

A wife as a President and him behind her, using all his power as usual, right?

Well, not quite.

The solution is not so straightforward.

The problem for Chávez is that Venezuelan wives end up being …..VENEZUELAN WIVES!

 I sure know, I’ve got one!

Before you stop reading arguing that I am a misogynist and that I shouldn’t use this blog to settle my domestic affairs, let me tell you that I think that Venezuelan women are wonderful, intelligent, competent human beings but they cannot help it: they are genetically programmed to be Venezuelan women.

When you start dating them, they answer “whatever you want, sweetheart” to any question that you may have, they are soft, gentle, understanding and sooo beautiful. They move their long hair, make you little eyes and give you a million dollar smile that takes you to flirting paradise. Then, once they get married, the genetic switch is activated and they transform themselves into “cuaimas” (see translation here)

The problem with cuaimas is that they cannot be tamed. Quite the opposite, they tame you! And if you are not happy with it, they send you to hell and leave you forever. They may or may not have a career, may or may not have kids, may or may not have money, they don’t care: cuaimas have very short tempers and a mind of their own.

So that’s Chávez dilemma: nobody knows how a Venezuelan wife will behave when put in a Presidential seat, but giving the normal behavior of any Venezuelan wife, he surely knows that’s not a very promising situation for him.

He may end up serving her  coffee in the Alo Presidenta.

So, he’d better settle for one of his brothers, or his mom.

….Although his mom also happens to be a Venezuelan wife.

Jorge Arena
Most Distinguished Returning Ghost
and PTG (Proud Tomato Grower).

the above citation is due to manuel Caballero
in an excellent interview by Mori Ponsowy that appeared in March in the argentinean La Nacion. I have seldom read anything that condensates so
well my own perception of Hugo Chavez.

Here’s the translated interview and here’s my post. Enjoy.

CARACAS .- Manuel Caballero is one of the most known and
respected historians of Venezuela. National Journalism Award (1979),
National History Prize (1994) and Simon Bolivar Prize Biennale (2001), his
fame, however, is not due to his academic work, but is rather due to his
continuing work as an essayist and opinion journalist . Always
controversial, his articles generate debate not only about historical
issues, but also about the most pressing contemporary issues. Since 1965,
he has been collaborator of newspapers such as El Nacional, El Diario de
Caracas and, currently, El Universal. Despite his long militancy in the
left, the lucidity of his analysis, the iconoclasm of his ideas, and his
fervent opposition to the paternalism of the state has become a required
Sunday reading for all sectors.

Author of more than 50 books, his
writings combine historical erudition and a witty pen. He is famous for his
sense of humour and his mordacity. Our appointment is at nine o’clock, but
he suggests that it may be earlier. “At eight I have already written my
article, read all the newspapers, and when my wife lived, I had given her
her first beating,” he says, laughing at his own joke.

He lives
alone in a small apartment that, like many in Caracas, overlooks the Avila
mountain. In the bright and colorful living room where he receives La
Nación there is a table full of ornaments where live together a high Simon
Bolivar in wood, with all Mafalda’s characters. He points to us other
Argentines characters on the table: three small plastic dolls,
representing Evita, Peron and Gardel.

Caballero militated for
eighteen years in the Communist Party, was arrested during the
dictatorship, and was a founder and a member of the Movimiento al
Socialism party until it decided to support Chavez. “I told them
explicitly that if they were going to devote themselves to lick the
ass of the military, they could count me out”. Since 1958, when Perez
Jimenez felt, I have criticized every single ruler”, says Caballero, that
prides himself on not having ever worked for any government.
“That’s what gives me the authority to oppose now. I even told Ramon J.
Velasquez, whom I admire, when he assumed the presidency, that I was not
only in opposition, but that I wanted him to make a bad government so that
we Venezuelans remove from our heads the idea that everything should come
from the State. “

When asked about his political militancy, he
replies that first and foremost he is antimilitarist. “If being
antimilitarist is to be left, as I was always taught, I am on the left; if
it means to be from the right, I am on the right, if it means being in the
center, I will be in the center. But, one thing is for sure, in each case I
am in the extreme: extreme left, extreme right or extreme center.”

— Is there a socialist government in Venezuela?

–
This government is not socialist nor on the facts or in its approach. Hugo
Chavez is not a communist, nor a socialist or a Muslim, as he once said.
But he is all that at the same time if it guarantees him to stay in power
forever. Chavez is a chavista and what he loves about Fidel Castro
are not things that Fidel did or failed to do in Cuba, but the fact that he
has been almost half a century in power.

— Why do you claim that
Chavez is not a socialist?

– I am tempted to respond by saying that
I refer to the proofs. But I will be more friendly. The problem with the
word “socialism” is the emotional and mythic charge that it carries.
With the same word have been designated very different doctrines and
practice policies. Socialist was Stalin, like Hitler, who was a
national-socialist, and socialist was Pol Pot, on the other hand, Willy
Brandt was also a socialist. The political practice of Chavez resembles the
fascism of Mussolini and his Latin American version which was Peron, with
the difference that Peron was supported by the organised working class,
while the fundamental support for Chavez are the marginal class.

—
Do you find other similarities between Chavez and Peron?

– As Peron,
and perhaps more than him, Chavez is the largest demagogue in the history
of Latin America. There is a confessed liking by Chavez of Peron. When he
was in full election campaign, when he was nationalizing a group of
argentineans, he ended his speech by saying “Viva el General Peron!” In the
Paseo Vargas he made erect a statue of Evita alongside the “Che” Guevara.
Another big similarity is the use of democratic mechanisms to combat
democracy.

— Do you think that is why Chavez has much sympathy in
Argentina?

– I would not say that the Argentine people support
Chavez, but the Argentine government does. Unfortunately, we live in a
world in which Christian charity has prevailed for thousands of years and
appreciation for the alms manifests itself in a lot of people who prefer to
reach out their hands to receive, instead of making it callous by hard
work. Over there there are eight hundred thousand dollars roaming that are
not little thing: the one who is willing to receive them is willing to be
grateful.

— What are the greatest achievements of the current
government?

– I owe three things to the government of Hugo
Chavez. First, having taught me that political parties, as
individuals, are capable of suicide. Second, having me shown that the
people can be wrong. And thirdly, giving me the evidence of how
unable to govern are the military. This is not the first government that
shows these things, but it is the first to combine all three
simultaneously.

— Do you think it will be possible to export the
Bolivarian revolution to the rest of Latin America?

– Lenin, who
created a special organization to export the revolution and who had the
support of a nation of two hundred million people did not suceed in that
quest, nor Mao, with more than one billion Chinese people as enthusiastic
supporters, and neither Fidel, despite how well he succeeded in exploiting
his romantic image of a guerrilla leader. Do you think that that could be
achieved by such a politically and ideologically inconsistent
character as Chavez?

– Reading about the country, I am surprised at
getting versions that are diametrically opposed on the same fact, depending
on who is consulted. How can we know the truth in today’s
Venezuela?

– One of the most pernicious things that are due to this
government is an absolute division of the society, as it had never existed
in our country. The social hatred is well known, both as the geographical
distribution of the facts and consciences. Here, now, you are absolutely
right because you are my friend, or you are not right because you are my
enemy, rather than you are my friend because you are right. All this makes
it very difficult to know where is the truth. However, sometimes the myths
can be undone by studying the same official discourse. At one point, the
president said that he was going to launch a campaign to eradicate
illiteracy, and that it was a shame that 10% of adults did not know how to
read or write. That single sentence contains a contradiction: if it is the
only government that has been involved in literacy how is it that the
remaining 90% of the population can read and write? On another occasion he
said: “I have never supported or support the FARC. If I support the
FARC, the Venezuelan people would be entitled to throw me out of
here.”

— Why Venezuela became involved in the recent
Colombian-Ecuadorian conflict?

– The intrusion by the Venezuelan
government has two and only two explanations: the first is the alliance
between the Colombian bandits of the FARC and the Venezuelan government,
and the second is the search for an external enemy to allow Chavez, on the
one hand, to redo his virginity in a matter of popularity through an
ultranationalist speech and, on the other, to compact the Venezuelan armed
forces behind him.

— Can the offensive by the Venezuelan
Goverment be interpreted as an attempt to avoid the American meddling in
Latin America?

– Contrary to what the Chavista propaganda
would like us to believe, it is the Venezuelan meddling in the conflict
which could lead to a more open and active interference of the US. There is
no Venezuelan national interest to justify interfering in the matter,
except Chavez’s personal interest of provoking an intervention that could
allow him to stay in power forever using the same alibi as Fidel
did.

— Do you think that, with regard to Venezuela, the
resolution of the border crisis is a final one?

– Neither this
crisis, nor any other similar crisis arising in the future will have a real
and definitive solution while Chavez remains in power. His policy remains
focused on the exploitation of nationalism and the militarization of the
Venezuelan society.

— Has the situation of the marginalized
classes improved with Chavez?

– Yes, it is undeniable. But those are
the social sectors most likely to accept and prefer the bestowal. Due to
their status, they do not think what may happen next week because their big
problem is what they are going to eat this evening. Chavez has used the
bestowal as a policy, especially at times of elections. But the hard alms
lasts what the alms lasts. Chavez has been governing for ten years, and
some people are starting saying that they would rather collect a
salary at the end of the month than continue receiving alms. It is a matter
of dignity.

— Do you think that the balance of the Bolivarian
revolution may have something positive in the sense that it woke up the
middle class to participate in politics?

– I believe that the only
legacy of the Bolivarian revolution is the independence of Venezuela, but I
suppose that you did not refer to our Independence Revolution. It is that
this can not be called neither “revolution” nor “Bolivarian”! That
“Bolivarian” is a sovereign stupidity. Bolivar was not even a Democrat: was
an aristocrat of the eighteenth century, a son of the Enlightenment.
Therefore the “Bolivarian socialism” is almost an oxymoron, like saying
“white blackness.”

— And “revolution”?

— But is that Chavez
has not even nationalized a grocer’s shop (a bodega) in the llano! Here the
basic industries had already been nationalized, and without
blood.

— Are there political prisoners in Venezuela?

— Of
course! One example: there are three commissioners of the Metropolitan
Police that have been prisoners for three years, they have not been able to
judge them because they have not found how to do it. And about the
impartiality of judges I will give you just one example: last year, at the
opening ceremony of the judicial year, all the judges began to shout “Uh,
ah, Chavez no se va!” That had been one of the slogans of the
campaign by itself. What independence of the judiciary is that?

—
Considering that Chavez’s opposition is ranging from the extreme left to
extreme right, what chance of success do you think it may have in the
regional elections in November?

– The opposition has committed many
errors. Perhaps the most serious was to be drifted along by radical groups
flying the promise that Chavez could be overthrown. Just now the opposition
is learning that that is not the way to get rid of Chávez. Leon Blum
said that politics is a game where not all hits are collected, but where
all mistakes are paid double. We are paying the mistake of having
elected Chavez. The worst plague that can fall to a people is to have a
military government. I would not know when we will finish paying because I
am convinced that Chavez is not going to leave power unless it is by force,
but that does not mean necessarily through a military coup. We have to
accept the idea that the fight is tough and possibly long, that we screwed
up very deep and that when he goes away he will leave us a country in ruins
and, if that were not enough, ungovernable.

What an interview with Chavez’ brother Adan! (Don’t miss the picture and the pointed finger in the article, it tells you the whole story in some sense). It sounds like something out of The Onion or Saturday Night Life. You have to love the “errors”, “lies” and “excuses” of the revolution. Some highlights:

Q: How do you justify the numbers saying that the number of enrolled students went down by 2.5 million from 2006?

A.Ch. I don’t know where you got that number that it decreased by 2.5 million.

Q: In 05-06 there are 10.2 million students and in 2007 it went down to 7.6 million.

A.Ch. That is an error, in 05-06, without missions; there were 7.4 million students. The years after that there were 7.6 million.

Q: So, there is a contradiction with the total of 10.2 million?

A.Ch. It is an error. If we have to correct it we will. (Why don’t they?)

Q: Ten years ago the registration reached in first grade 657,448 kids, in one decade that number ahs not been reached. Moreover, there are 232 thousand kids between 6 and 7 who are excluded.

A.Ch. We have increased coverage for that age. We are attacking the social causes, without looking for justifications (??). We don’t hide that half the kids in middle level education are out of the system. But before only 23 out of one hundred were in. The deterioration is such that you can’t fix it in 5 or ten years.

(My comment: if registration doubled on a relative scale, how come the total absolute number has never been topped? Moreover, since they did nothing for five years, it is no surprise it “deteriorated”, but ten years ago, Physics and Mathematics was taught at 90% of public high schools, today they have no teachers in over half n these areas and the students are passed automatically, so don’t give me that BS)

Q: The literacy target has been questioned. You said there was 4% illiteracy in the country that means there are 930,000 illiterate people in the country.

A.Ch. When a country is declared free of illiteracy it does not mean it has 0%; Unesco recognizes that a country with 4% literacy is free of illiteracy.

Q: In 2005 you said you had taught 1.5 million people to read, how come now there are 900 thousand illiterate persons in Venezuela.

A. Ch. There was an error (Another one!) When the mission was started we announced that there were two million. We taught 1.5 million to read. Let us assume (Why?) that we made an error in calculation at that time.

Q: You always said it was 1.5 million On the other hand Unesco never declared Venezuela a country free of illiteracy, the letter only recognizes the effort.

A. Ch. There is a letter published by the General Secretary of Unesco, where some achievement is recognized. Unesco recognizes a country with less than 4% illiteracy to be free of it. We have less than 4%, because we have not stopped. We don’t hide anything…I reiterate Unesco recognizes that a country with 4% illiteracy is free of it.
There you have it, he implicitly recognizes the old lie that Unesco never “certified” Venezuela as free of illiteracy, which was mentioned by Chavez and by PSUV’s candidate to Metropolitan Mayor Aristobulo Isturiz. This was “certified” in the blogging world by Alek and Sydney and in the academic world by Francisco Rodriguez.

But the striking thins is how Adan Chavez lies throughout the interview, attributes things to errors in the past, rather than the outright robolutionary exaggerations they were. He takes the numbers too lightly and really never gives a straight answer. He also fails to recognize that things at the high school level are even worse than when Chavez got to power.

It is a truly a farcical interview. The attitude seems to be: The revolution is always right, even when it is wrong. Except that Mr. Chavez knows there are few achievements in the educational front because the revolution had no educational plan ten years ago and today’s plan is simply ideological not educational.

It is just lies, errors and manipulations. What else is new?

I will be traveling on my annual vacation. I will be gone to three weeks to the other side of the planet. Bruni and Spinoza and even my distinguished blogger Jorge Arena will provide some ghost coverage as needed and once in a while I may even try to contribute. Hope the country holds together in my absence, funny things seem to happen when I travel…

While we have become accustomed to the most bizarre and
outrageous behavior and statements from Chavez Government officials, it was truly amazing to
watch former General Prosecutor Isaias Rodriguez come on TV and start blaming
the US Government, the “Empire”, for all of the country’s problems.