Chávez's presidential inauguration took place 2 February 1999. He deviated from the usual words of the presidential oath when he took it, proclaiming: 'I swear before God and my people that upon this moribund constitution I will drive forth the necessary democratic transformations so that the new republic will have a Magna Carta befitting these new times.' Freedom in Venezuela suffered following 'the decision of President Hugo Chávez, ratified in a national referendum, to abolish congress and the judiciary, and by his creation of a parallel government of military cronies'. Soon after being established into office, Chávez spent much of his time attempting to abolish existing checks and balances in Venezuela. He appointed new figures to government posts, adding leftist allies to key positions and 'army colleagues were given a far bigger say in the day-to-day running of the country'."
TL; DR Institutions which should have fought back didn't and populism usurped the democracy.
Source: I have relatives who were born and raised in Venezuela.
>... Cuba, where he met Castro and became friends with him. During his stay in Colombia, he spent six months receiving guerilla training and establishing contacts with the FARC and ELN terrorist groups, and even adopted a nom de guerre, Comandante Centeno
He may have sold it as populism, but once in power switched to dismantling democracy. It seems tricky to get rid of that stuff - the system in Cuba has been stable for years if not so good for the residents.
You mean, not a centralized, planned economy.
As soon as oil prices slumped, the economy started falling apart, and measures taken to mitigate the effect just made things worse.
America is a Republic, as is most so-called 'Democracies'. I can't wait for the first true democracy to emerge, where we use technology to cast votes.
I like the idea of where you can vote on all bills/issues/etc, or you can lend your vote to someone you trust for specific issues - like Bill Gates or Elon Musk.
See Liquid Democracy: https://medium.com/organizer-sandbox/liquid-democracy-true-d...
In the past I would.
I can definitely agree that going 'full socialism' hasn't had a good track record, but somehow it doesn't feel right to call what we have over here 'capitalism'.
Supply and demand are null/void, the government might then decide lets up tp production as it's needed. Capitalism is the market decides based on indicators from 'votes' --everytime you spend money you're voting on what that item is worth, how much supply/demand is given to it, etc...
Giving people who live in a country benefits and providing social well-being is NOT true-socialism, it's just love/respect for fell human beings. Ensuring everyone in a country lives above poverty shouldn't be debated about it should be something people take a sense in pride about and something they focus on eradicating.
It's not true-socialism in you still have a market, market conditions still predicate what's bought/sold/manufactured. The only difference is tax dollars are spent a little more on helping people. I think America is a horrible manager of money we could easily implement universal healthcare or guaranteed basic income and change some of the tax code to afford it all.
There's plenty of things we waste money on. The defense department has gatherings where they pay around $5 per ounce for coffee, $15 for donuts or pastries, etc.. private contractors can somehow get away with gouging the government and basically stealing tax-dollars.
We spend a trillion a year on a huge military, we don't need to be the police of the entire world. We need to close all bases, we have enough nukes/etc to dispel threats to our own borders, let's stay neutral again until we're called into another world war, but let's stop all the wars we're currently in.
I hope the predictions are true for 2030 that 40% of jobs will disappear forever, as it'll force us to really consider guaranteed basic income or end up just as Venezuela is now.
Not only was Venezueala wealthy before Chavez, it ran proper elections. Its balanced, stable democracy reflected its population's will.
The unfortunate truth is aloof upper/middle classes ignored Venezuela's poor. The latter got pissed off and, on their own volition, voted in a demagogue who then tore apart the country. Many problems in Latin America find origin in American meddling. Venezuela, today, is not one of them.
1) the US manipulated, deposed, and built governments there for the last century, often triggering or at least backing civil wars. Much of this was done to further corporate interests, like The United Fruit Company.
2) During the Cold War, the US convinced the governments of the regions to retool their militaries as counter-insurgency forces to counter communist rebels.
Those set the stage for any number of oppressive regimes and wars.
The rise of Chavez could be seen as obvious, given the above, but Venezuela's specific problems today are due to Chavez' party and his successor.