Hugo Chavez, the vocal and irritating Venezuelan President, does not hide his anti-American motives. Hours of ramblings on his talk show, Alo Presidente, are used to "divulge" the injustices of capitalism, US imperialism and the ever present CIA, and give accolades to the glorious Bolivarian socialist revolution. He often is seen parading with his autocratic posse – Nicaragua’s Ortega, Ecuador’s Correa, Honduras’ Zelaya, Iran’s Ahmadinejad, and the original political celebrity bad boys, the Castro brothers – in well-publicized political arenas. They even have their own exclusive BFF club, formerly known as ALBA, which now has a new and improved name…"The something something of our peoples of our Americas something something.” Hugo Chavez could very well be the Paris Hilton of the international political community.
Striking similarities.
As it seems with Paris (bless her heart, and soul - she needs all the blessing she can get), Chavez has a polarizing effect. You either love him, or you hate him. Chavismo may be appealing on the outside, but you would never let it take care of the kids – it’s simply trouble. Only Brazil’s Lula has seemed to be Chavez’s long-term, fence-sitting BFF.
It’s not surprising then, that in both Peru and Honduras the Chavista influence has come to the forefront of arguments and concerns, as it well should. In the past, Peru has suspended diplomatic relations with Venezuela over suspected meddling in elections. Recent indigenous strikes, also suspected as having Chavista influence, have tarnished the US-friendly government’s reputation. This will allow Humala, a Venezuelan-funded puppet, to make good headway in the 2010 presidential elections.
In Honduras, citizens have been leery of how much influence Chavez has had in new legislation, including the proposed illegal referendum to change the Honduran Constitution that ended with Zelaya pleading before the UN to be reinstated as President.
Despite the outcries of the Honduran population and interim government declaring thatousting their unlawful president was in fact lawful and democratic, the world seems to differ. The UN General Assembly unanimously supported a declaration condemning the coup, lining up the world’s nations behind Chavez in the attempt to force the exiled Zelaya back into office.
So, what do the mentioned events have in common? That’s right, major headway for theBolivarian revolution, headed by Hugo Chavez and his petro-dollars. The pendulum is swinging and we're all swinging with Chavez. It's like a bad commercial: "I swing, you swing, we all swing for.."well, you get the point.
What consequence does this have for the future? Well, the US will find itself losing influence in the hemisphere, soon catering to the whims of a heard of populist dictators in the south if we wish to keep alliances and trade agreements. The governments for the people, but not of the people have historically proven to create suffering for many. The train of thought seems to go along these lines: to bring a few poor up, all must be brought down. It levels the playing field, and makes all equal. The real question is if it will make them free, because "equality" in theory cannot be obtained. Different people simply desire different things. The main goal should be to allow people to pursue what they desire, aka freedom!
The US needs to stand for transparent democracy, not simply a pseudo-democracy that proclaims itself to be a democracy simply because it allows it’s citizens to cast a vote. (Yes, I said democracy a lot.) If a simple election, where ordinary people cast votes constitutes a democracy, then let’s let Cuba back in the Organization of American States (OAS) without such foolish notions that they need to adhere to democratic principles! Cuba has let their citizens vote for decades! (And of course Castro has always won. Even with such unanimity as 98% of the votes!) What’s all the fuss about making Cuba adhere to democratic ideals embraced by the OAS if they are already abiding by them? There is obviously a disconnect between what we say we stand for, and what we actually stand for.
The people in both Honduras and Peru share adverse feelings toward the encroaching Chavistaplague. They must feel the anguish that those who lost friends and risked their lives in Iran to protest against corrupt elections felt when the Free World rhetorically turned their back on them. By siding with Chavez in the matter of Honduras, we are also turning our back on these people who desire democracy and liberty as we do.
