I've seen a lot of threads around here where somebody will make an offhanded comment about
Hugo Chavez (he's a dictator, he's crazy, he eats puppies), and then there will be an entire subthread discussing the alleged puppy eating habits of Hugo Chavez. It seems to me that this discussion is healthy. We should determine it aids the progressive/anti-war movement for Cindy Sheehan and Harry Belafonte to be associating with him.
That said, Hugo Chavez is a much more complicated than either "socialist nutjob" or "hero of the working man." Let's break it down.
[more on the flip]
Points of contention on Hugo
He WAS democratically elected. TWICE!
Yes, this is true. Not only did he win Presidential elections in 1998 and 2000, he also won a vote where the opposition attempted to recall him in 2004. This, plus the crushing majority he won in the parliament in 2005 indicates he's clearly the choice of the people!
BUT...
This doesn't mean he's a friend of democracy or committed to its integrity. The new Constitution is positively Bushian in its executive powers (full text). Plus, the opposition parties refused to take part in the Parliamentary Elections of 2005, demonstrating perhaps that they don't have faith in the system. This strikes me as a big blow to a democracy. Venezeula is considered by many to be sliding toward autocracy. We'll leave out allegations of voter fraud from 2004, because they're very difficult to substantiate.
Hugo hates freedom of the press!
Yes, Chavez has clamped down substantially on the ability of the media outlets to disseminate anti-government viewpoints. The Washington Post hammered him for it. Civil liberties people, take note. You can't just respect speech that helps along your agenda.
BUT...
Pretty much the entire establishment, and therefore the press, is vehemently opposed to Chavez's populist platform. What's a poor prez. to do!
Hugo Chavez is a SOCIALIST NUTJOB!
YAWN. I get called this sometimes. His economic program seems fine. To an extent, he is a hero of the people.
Chavez calls Bush a terrorist
This is my biggest problem with US liberals going to talk to him. The reason Chavez calls Bush a terrorist is because the interests of the USA and Venezuela sometimes conflict, and he likes to call this US imperialism. When we agree with Chavez that Bush is a terrorist on a level greater than Osama Bin Laden, it's forwarding the worst liberal stereotype that we put other countries' interests ahead of our own.