The Concept of Homeland Property

Thursday, December 24 2010, by Debate Socialista

President Chávez practices the Property of the Homeland concept which is superior to the concept of Social Property. He wraps it, and he gives it meaning. He makes it more human, more understandable and he brings it closer to the people’s souls.

(click here to view entire article)

Hugo Chávez’s First Decade in Office: Breakthroughs and Shortcomings

By Steve Ellner - Latin American Perspectives (January 2010 Vol. 37, No.1.)

Now that the presidency of Hugo Chávez is beginning its second decade, the insistence of some critics on holding the government accountable by evaluating its concrete results becomes increasingly compelling. The assessment of gains and shortcomings is particularly important in light of the assertion of Chávez’s adversaries, as well as the concerns of some analysts who are more sympathetic to his government, that rent-seeking continues to underpin the Venezuelan economy and society, which remain completely dependent on petroleum (López Maya, 2008: 7; Coronil, 2008; Kelly and Palma, 2004: 229–230; Lombardi, 2003: 5–6).

(click here to view entire article)

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on How to Tackle Climate Change: “We Must Go from Capitalism to Socialism”

Monday 21st December 2009, by Amy Goodman - Democracy Now!

We speak with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez about climate change, the Copenhagen summit and President Obama. Chavez calls the COP15 summit undemocratic and accuses world leaders of only seeking a face-saving agreement. “We must reduce all the emissions that are destroying the planet,” Chavez says. “That requires a change in the economic model: we must go from capitalism to socialism.”

Watch the video here:

Review of Venezuela Documentary 'Inside the Revolution' by 'Lenin's Tomb'

Review of Venezuela Documentary 'Inside the Revolution' by 'Lenin's Tomb'

Thursday September 24th, by Lenin's Tomb

What to make of the Bolivarian revolution? Despite its limitations, it has achieved real decreases in poverty, higher social spending per capita, elements of grassroots democracy, and a widespread radicalisation among Venezuela's working class. The revolution has thus far withstood various challenges from the right, including a coup, largely because of the solid backing the Chavez government receives from the poor. Unlike previous efforts at social transformation in Latin America, this one has not been drowned in rivers of blood. Is Venezuela therefore a model for others to follow, as well as an inspiration in its own right?

The new documentary Inside The Revolution (trailer here) deals with precisely this question. This sort of film could so easily just re-tread old ground. It could just as easily lapse into uncritical adulation. Or it could just be very cliched, with various pleasing sentiments structured around a 'story so far' narrative. Already, films about Venezuela are characterised by some very familiar vistas: the red t-shirts, the smiling Chavez supporters, the scandalously abusive corporate media footage, and the slums, all overlaid with cheery joropo music. And if these were to be the fixtures of a genre that ossified the exciting and conflict-ridden social processes of Venezuela into low budget entertainment for leftists, then the Bolivarian revolution would have been done a disservice. But Inside The Revolution takes the argument deeper than previous films, making an effort to gauge what kind of example Venezuela provides for the left. It has less glamour and polemical bite than Pilger's The War on Democracy, for example, but is intellectually more challenging.

The argument is more distinctive than the material, most of which can be found in useful texts such as Bart Jones' biography of Hugo Chavez - cryptically entitled ¡Hugo! - and Gregory Wilpert's Changing Venezuela By Taking Power (an excellent counterblast to the Holloway thesis). Thus, you get a very brief account of the history of Venezuelan politics, from the Jimenez dictatorship to the highly controlled liberal democracy during the oil boom of the post-war era, to the social collapse and soaring poverty from 1978 onward. You get a discussion of the radicalisation in 1989, a counterpoint to the general demoralisation on the Left as the Berlin Wall fell. There is footage of Chavez's attempted coup in 1992, and his 72 second speech to the nation upon surrendering in which he famously said that his goals could not be achieved "por ahora" (for now). This statement became a catchphrase for millions, as Chavez became a hero to the poor and, upon his release, he began to build up support for a presidential campaign. He wins, brings about constitutional changes, faces down the hysteria of the ruling class, defeats a coup, braves a referendum defeat, suffers electoral setbacks, but continues to make progress. So far, so familiar - and accurate too.

(click here to view entire review)

Venezuelan Education Law: Socialist Indoctrination or Liberatory Education?

[Venezuelan opposition activists allege that the new Education Law is unconstitutional, anti-democratic, politicizes the classroom, threatens the family and religion, and will allow the state to take children away from their parents for indoctrination. Are they correct?]

Venezuelan Education Law: Socialist Indoctrination or Liberatory Education?

August 21st 2009, by James Suggett - Venezuelanalysis.com

Venezuelan opposition activists allege that the new Education Law, which the National Assembly passed unanimously shortly after midnight on August 14th following an extended legislative session, is unconstitutional, anti-democratic, politicizes the classroom, threatens the family and religion, and will allow the state to take children away from their parents for indoctrination. Are they correct?

In defense of the law, Education Minister Hector Navarro told several national media outlets that the opposition's claims are not only incorrect, they "form part of a campaign that seeks to generate fear in the population so they will be against the [Education] Law."

(click here to view entire article)

Venezuela: Socialism for the 21st Century

[In 1998, Hugo Chávez was elected President of Venezuela. He spoke strongly and acted against savage neoliberalism in his electoral campaign and after taking power but socialism was not a part of his vocabulary or program for his first few years in office. Since late 2004, he has been increasingly calling for Socialism for the 21^st Century in Venezuela, and speaking out against capitalism and imperialism.]

Venezuela: Socialism for the 21st Century

August 5th 2009, by Peter Bohmer - Znet

For much of the 19^th and 20^th century, socialism was the hope of millions of working people around the globe, including the United States in the early part of the 20^th century. This was the period of the growth of the Socialist Party and the Industrial Workers of the World, the IWW. Socialism has meant a society committed to meeting the basic needs of all people including health, food, education, and housing , where there is no poverty and full employment, where enterprises and firms are socially and publicly owned not privately owned by capitalists to make profits. It has meant a society where workers control how firms are run and where the economy is democratically planned to serve human needs. As a great socialist revolutionary, Rosa Luxemburg said in the early 20^th century, socialism requires democracy, and democracy requires socialism.

In the 1980's, we were told by government leaders such as Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, most economists, media pundits such as Thomas Friedman that there is no alternative (TINA) to unregulated market capitalism. This economic model and the related policies are called neoliberalism in Latin America.

(click here to view entire article)

Challenges and Possibilities: Learning from ALBA and the Bank of the South

[At the same time capitalism’s credibility as an engine of development (in both free-market and state-directed forms) is being weakened, the governments of a number of South American countries are working to advance new regional initiatives that have the potential to promote and strengthen socialist-inspired development alternatives-the most important are the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) and the Bank of the South. Although these two initiatives do not have the explicit mission of promoting socialist transformation, they are critically important because they concretize the existence of alternatives to capitalist growth strategies and, in the case of ALBA, offer support to governments that are themselves pursuing a socialist-inspired process of transformation.]

Challenges and Possibilities: Learning from ALBA and the Bank of the South

May 22nd 2009, by Martin Hart-Landsberg - International Debt Observatory

This is a time of great challenges and also great possibilities. The first decade of the 21st century may well mark an important turning point in the international struggle to supplant capitalism.

For decades the great majority of third world governments have followed neoliberal policies despite the failure of those policies to deliver their promised export-led growth. As a consequence, anti-neoliberal political movements have grown in strength throughout Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. While an important political development, the emancipatory potential of those movements has remained limited, in large part, because of their focus on neoliberalism as the primary impediment to progress. More specifically, many participating activists and academics continue to draw a sharp distinction between neoliberalism and capitalism; while they strongly oppose the former, they remain largely unwilling to reject the latter.

Most tend to blame the development failures of their respective nations on government policies (often implemented under pressure) that liberalized, deregulated, and privatized economic activity. They believe that the East Asian experience of high-speed, export-led growth and industrial transformation demonstrates that active state intervention and direction of economic activity can produce successful capitalist development. Therefore, they have often directed their efforts at enhancing the state capacities of their respective countries in an attempt to recreate East Asian economic successes.

However, we are now at a point where it may be possible to win a strong majority of these activists and intellectuals to an anti-capitalist perspective, a critical change if we are succeed in building the movement clarity and strength necessary to advance a socialist alternative. One reason is that the exploitative and contradictory nature of the East Asian growth strategy is becoming clearer. Ever more intense intra-regional competition has begun to undermine East Asia’s past social and economic gains and generate worker resistance. Perhaps even more dramatic, the region’s export-led growth strategy has finally run up against its own limits, as an ever deepening global economic crisis triggered by imbalances in the U.S. economy has thrown East Asian economies into their own downward economic spiral.

(click here to view entire article)

Globovisón: The Loose Cannon of Venezuelan Media

[Venezuela’s socialist national project is well underway and making ever more significant strides, in spite of an entrenched, privileged minority in opposition, relentlessly spurred on by the corporate media and its vociferous attacks.]

Globovisón: The Loose Cannon of Venezuelan Media

May 2oth 2009, by Carlos Ruiz - VenCentral

In their classic 1988 book Manufacturing Consent, Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky demonstrated how corporate media select topics, place emphasis, set boundaries, ask questions and shape content in accordance with broad capitalist imperatives. It’s a largely unconscious process driven by conformist human beings, and infinitely more effective than the heavy-handed methods of past communist regimes.

During the 20th century, ballooning marketing budgets played a crucial role in the marginalization, and ultimate extinction of influential labor-based/progressive media. Today’s mass media subservience to elite power structures is an inevitable consequence of the pursuit of profit. Advertising revenues continue to flow to any given publication, radio or TV station on the condition that its reporting and general content supports a business-friendly status quo.

(click here to view entire article)

Venezuela Combats Crisis by Fighting Corruption, Bureaucracy

[Confronted by the global economic crisis and a sharp drop in oil prices, the Venezuelan government has launched an offensive against corruption as part of its austerity drive.]

Venezuela Combats Crisis by Fighting Corruption, Bureaucracy

May 2nd 2009, by Federico Fuentes - Green Left Weekly

Confronted by the global economic crisis and a sharp drop in oil prices, the Venezuelan government has launched an offensive against corruption as part of its austerity drive.
This has included measures to cut down on superfluous expenses and bloated salaries of high-ranking public officials. The public prosecutor has also initiated a number of court cases against former and current elected officials for alleged corruption.

(click here to view entire article)

Another Left Turn In Venezuela

[The development of the Bolivarian Revolution, including using the institutional gains achieved to date to meet human needs and develop popular potentials via humane policies, as well as establishing further institutional gains, has encountered three major obstacles: residual capitalists, residual oligarchic government, and residual mainstream media.]

Another Left Turn In Venezuela

March 30th 2009, by Michael Albert - ZNet

On the top page of ZNet, in the box in the center column labeled Venezuela, for example, you will see some interviews, including one with Julio Chavez, Carlos Lanz, and Fernando Torrealba respectively, at the time of the interviews, Mayor of Carora in Venezuela, Venezuelan vice minister of Education and former activist within the economy, and Supreme Court Justice, again, in Venezuela. In addition, on the Audio page linked from the ZNet top page under the ZNet tab, you will see a link as well to a talk by myself and one by Noam Chomsky - both recorded at an event at MIT a week ago, where Julio Chavez spoke as well, but in Spanish, so that his talk isn't online as yet.I draw your attention to these pieces because of their special cumulative relevance to the discussion below.

The Bolivarian Revolution

The development of the Bolivarian Revolution, including using the institutional gains achieved to date to meet human needs and develop popular potentials via humane policies, as well as establishing further institutional gains, has encountered three major obstacles: residual capitalists, residual oligarchic government, and residual mainstream media.

Many people look at Venezuela as an established society of the future and ask, okay, what are its features, what are their benefits and costs, are they worthy, do they meet our most exalted desires? This is a mistake.

Revolutions take time to undertake gigantic transformations of attitudes, habits, and structures. Usually a revolution takes many years, or even decades, to increase popular commitment and raise popular consciousness, as well as win positive improvements - finally reaching a turning point where mass consciousness is sufficiently high, aroused desire is sufficiently high, and organized movements are as a result able to direct development thereafter not from a position of opposition, but due to being in possession of organized power.

(click here to view entire article)

Defining 21st Century Socialism in Venezuela

[Leftist visitors and international observers often ask of the Bolivarian process, "What does 21st century socialism mean? What is it?" Those same leftists must be wary of answering that question. To interpret events is to participate in them, to define events is to exercise control over them.]

Defining 21st Century Socialism in Venezuela

March 7th 2009, by George Gabriel

Leftist visitors and international observers often ask of the Bolivarian process, "What does 21st century socialism mean? What is it?" Those same leftists must be wary of answering that question. To interpret events is to participate in them, to define events is to exercise control over them. It is about time that observers recognised the virtues of an undefined, uncertain, creative and rebellious movement; where ends remain a swirling vortex of values and passions and our means are less readily sacrificed to them. We leftists must not forget the lessons paid for in blood and sweat in "slave camps under the flag of freedom,"[1] in Russian Gulags and in the prison camps of the Khmer Rouge.

Nowhere has domination by categorisation been felt stronger than in the Middle East. Edward Said's groundbreaking Orientalism examines the historic process by which Europeans codified the "Middle East" into an exotic, sensual, chaotic, and immoral Other. The constructed Other, authored by European experts, was juxtaposed against the Occidental European reason, order, and Christianity, grounding a European identity that is still very much alive today. This process in the words of Said robbed the region's peoples of the chance to be "free subject(s) of thought or action."

(click here to view entire article)

“The People Won the Vote, Now The People Must Become the Government”

[Journalist and activist of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) Vanessa Davies spoke with Venezuelanalysis.com about the meaning of the referendum, the next steps and challenges ahead for the PSUV, gender in the Chávez government, the media, and U.S. President Barack Obama.]

“The People Won the Vote, Now The People Must Become the Government”

February 25th 2009, by Vanessa Davies & James Suggett - Venezuelanalysis

Two days after the referendum in which 54.9% of Venezuelans approved a constitutional amendment to lift term limits on elected officials, journalist and activist of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) Vanessa Davies spoke with Venezuelanalysis.com about the meaning of the referendum, the next steps and challenges ahead for the PSUV, gender in the Chávez government, the media, and U.S. President Barack Obama.

Vanessa Davies, could you please describe your role in the Bolivarian process?

I am a journalist. I worked for many years in a very right-wing newspaper. I have always been an activist of the Left. I have always been connected to the revolution. I do volunteer work in [the Venezuelan state television channel] VTV, and I do volunteer work with other alternative media. I collaborate with everything I can that will support the revolution.
Since the year 2008, I have participated in the national leadership of the PSUV, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela. We campaigned for the regional elections last November. In this campaign, the campaign for the amendment, personally, I dedicated myself to travelling around the country, to campaign face-to-face, and to work with the pro-amendment committee of VTV.

What is the significance of the results of Sunday's vote?

I think they show the revolutionary will of the majority of our people, their will toward transformation. Our oppressed and discriminated people are asserting their role in making the Bolivarian Revolution continue. Also, the majority of the people believes in and vouches for the leadership of Commander Chávez.

I think that when looking at the results we must also see who was defeated. I think the private communications corporations, incorrectly labeled the mass media, were defeated. These corporations act like political parties, and even beyond this, like conspiratorial groups, as in the case of Globovisión. I think they were defeated in the referendum. They had a campaign of lies, of terror. It is a campaign that we've dealt with throughout the Bolivarian Revolution, a campaign of deception, of manipulation of the middle class that has historically been very anti-communist in our country.

(click here to view entire article)

Hugo Chávez: Tides of Victory

[The referendum victory of Venezuela's president is founded on an extension of the understanding of democracy that has both national roots and regional parallels.]

Hugo Chávez: Tides of Victory

February 20th 2009, by Julia Buxton - Opendemocracy.net

The Venezuelan electorate is bent on using democratic mechanisms to fuel the demagogic ambitions of its populist president, Hugo Chávez. The voters have backed him and his party in thirteen of the fourteen elections and referendums held in the country since Chávez was inaugurated in February 1999. Now, on 15 February 2009, a majority of them went so far as to grant him his wish of being president for life: for in the referendum on that day 56% voted to lift term-limits on elected officials, thereby eroding a noble Latin American tradition of safeguarding democracy by limiting incumbency.

The distant hope

So argue Hugo Chávez's opponents at home and overseas - particularly in Washington, were the anti-Chávez lobby is striving to maintain the disproportionate influence it had under George W Bush into the Barack Obama administration. After the 15 February referendum, media and academic commentators have painted a frighteningly dystopian vision of Venezuela's political future. It all amounts to significant pressure on the new Democratic administration to follow the Bush policy of isolating and destabilising Chávez.

(click here to view entire article)

Venezuelans Vote to Eliminate Two-Term Limit on All Elected Office 54.4% to 45.6%

[At 9:35pm local time, with 94.2% of voted counted, Venezuela’s National Electoral Council announced that Venezuelans had voted 54.4% to 45.6% in favor of a constitutional amendment to eliminate the two-term limit on all elected office.]

Venezuelans Vote to Eliminate Two-Term Limit on All Elected Office 54.4% to 45.6%

February 15th 2009, by Venezuelanalysis.com

February 15, 2009 (venezuelanalysis.com)— At 9:35pm local time, three and a half hours after polls closed and with 94.2% of voted counted, Venezuela’s National Electoral Council announced that Venezuelans had voted 54.4% to 45.6% in favor of a constitutional amendment to eliminate the two-term limit on all elected office. Chávez supporters celebrated the nearly 9-point victory margin with enthusiasm, as it will allow President Hugo Chávez to run for a third full term in 2012.

(click here to view entire article)

Venezuela's Term Limits

[If there is one thing that Chavista and anti-Chavista pollers share, it's a significant shift in support for the referendum in recent weeks. To fully grasp why this has happened, we need to look more closely at the political dynamics underlying the process, and how these dynamics have come to bear on the impending election.]

Venezuela's Term Limits

February 14th 2009, by George Cicariello-Maher - CounterPunch

The story is a familiar one. Amid the collapse of two-party dominance, an independent leader rises to power. In an effort to calm frazzled nerves, he insists he will respect the rule of law and the will of the voters by maintaining the peaceful transfer of power at the end of his legally-established term. "There's no organization that I know that would put somebody in charge for a long period of time," he insists, "you always want turnover and change." But in power for nearly eight years, having established a fervent support base and concentrated power in his own hands, our fair leader no longer feels the need to comfort his opponents, and his discourse radicalizes as his view of term limits shifts. Dismissing his opposition as rigid "dogmatists," the leader now insists on the need to change course flexibly to meet circumstances. True and sustained change, he argues, requires the continuity of his successful leadership.

Unsurprisingly, his opponents fiercely oppose the move as dangerous: "It shows a fundamental contempt for the democratic process," one maintains, "and it's changing the rules to benefit yourself directly." Ironically, it was this very same argument that the leader himself had made five years prior, when vetoing efforts to loosen term limits. Not without controversy, then, was the decision of the region's largest newspaper--aligned politically with the leader--to wade into these conflictive waters with the following declaration:

The bedrock of... democracy is the voters' right to choose. Though well intentioned... the term limits law severely limits that right, which is why this page has opposed term limits from the outset... Term limits are seductive, promising relief from mediocre, self-perpetuating incumbents and gridlocked legislatures. They are also profoundly undemocratic, arbitrarily denying voters the ability to choose between good politicians and bad.

While the paper had previously insisted that any change to term limits come through popular referendum, it now reverses this view, taking the position that for reasons of political expediency, a simple vote in the small executive council will do.

Of which banana republic are we speaking, where thinly-veiled authoritarianism threatens democratic checks and balances, and weak-kneed apologists parade about under the banner of free press? Why, the place is none other than New York City, the leader none other than Michael Bloomberg, and the newspaper none other than the New York Times. Patience: we haven't even gotten to the hypocrisy part yet.

"Hugo Chávez's Choice"

Term limits have a long history, dating from ancient Greece and Rome and Aristotle's concept of "ruling and being ruled in turn." With a trademark selectiveness (see, e.g., Senate Report 104-158), those upholding the sanctity of this standard in U.S. politics do so with no mention of the other elements Aristotle would associate with democracy, most obviously the filling of all positions by random lot (except for generals, or strategoi, who in an intriguing inversion of our own system, were to be elected). And nor is there much mention of those countries in the wealthy world which see no need for such limitations, or those celebrated leaders who have accomplished purportedly historic tasks without such fetters: Tony Blair served for 10 years, Margaret Thatcher for 11. Franklin D. Roosevelt, consistently ranked among the greatest U.S. presidents served for 12, and would have served for 16 had he survived. And this is not to mention the unlimited terms available to U.S. senators and representatives.

(click here to view entire article)

Why The Venezuelan Amendment Campaign Is So Important

[The real problem is – and everyone knows this, they just don't want to discuss it – that Chávez represents the continuation of the Bolivarian project, a popular revolution which has transformed Venezuela and inspired similar transformations in several other Latin American countries.]

Why The Venezuelan Amendment Campaign Is So Important

February 11th 2009, by Diana Raby

Next Sunday, 15 February, Venezuelans vote in a referendum on a proposed Constitutional Amendment that will allow for any candidate to stand for the Presidency, or indeed for any elective office, without restriction on the number of terms they may serve. Only the people's vote will decide whether they are elected and how many terms they serve.

In other words, if President Hugo Chávez, who is already serving his second term under the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, wishes to stand for a third term, he may do so. Equally, the opposition mayor of Greater Caracas, Antonio Ledezma, may stand three or four times if he wants (and if the people vote for him).

This is no different from the practice here in the UK, where Margaret Thatcher won four elections for the Conservatives (although we did not have the privilege of voting for her personally as Prime Minister), and Tony Blair won three times for Labour. It is of course different from the situation in the US, where some sixty years ago a limit of two consecutive terms was introduced for the presidency.

But why is there such a fuss about this proposal in Venezuela? Once again, as so many times before in the last ten years, the media are full of stories about Chávez' dictatorial tendencies or being President for life, and the opposition goes on about "the principle of alternation [alternabilidad]". But they know perfectly well that Chávez will only be re-elected in 2012 if the people vote for him in elections which have been certified time and again as impeccably free and honest, and that the possibility of mid-term recall still exists and will be maintained. And alternation, as the experience here in the UK and in so many "advanced democracies" shows, is all too often a neat device to prevent any real change while giving the appearance of choice with a superficial change of personnel.

(click here to view entire article)

The Chávez Administration at 10 Years: The Economy and Social Indicators

[This paper looks at some of the most important economic and social indicators during the 10 years of the Chávez administration in Venezuela, as well as the current economic expansion. It also looks at the current situation and challenges.]

The Chávez Administration at 10 Years: The Economy and Social Indicators

February 5th 2009, by Mark Weisbrot, Rebecca Ray and Luis Sandoval - CEPR

For the full report in its original PDF format, click here (255kb).

Executive Summary
This paper looks at some of the most important economic and social indicators during the 10 years of the Chávez administration in Venezuela, as well as the current economic expansion. It also looks at the current situation and challenges.

Among the highlights:
The current economic expansion began when the government got control over the national oil company in the first quarter of 2003. Since then, real (inflationadjusted) GDP has nearly doubled, growing by 94.7 percent in 5.25 years, or 13.5 percent annually.

Most of this growth has been in the nonoil sector of the economy, and the private sector has grown faster than the public sector.

During the current economic expansion, the poverty rate has been cut by more than half, from 54 percent of households in the first half of 2003 to 26 percent at the end of 2008. Extreme poverty has fallen even more, by 72 percent. These poverty rates measure only cash income, and does take into account increased access to health care or education.

Over the entire decade, the percentage of households in poverty has been reduced by 39 percent, and extreme poverty by more than half.

Inequality, as measured by the Gini index, has also fallen substantially. The index has fallen to 41 in 2008, from 48.1 in 2003 and 47 in 1999. This represents a large reduction in inequality.

Real (inflationadjusted) social spending per person more than tripled from 1998-2006.

From 1998-2006, infant mortality has fallen by more than onethird. The number of primary care physicians in the public sector increased 12fold from 1999-2007, providing health care to millions of Venezuelans who previously did not have access.

There have been substantial gains in education, especially higher education, where gross enrollment rates more than doubled from 1999/2000 to 2007/2008.

The labor market also improved substantially over the last decade, with unemployment dropping from 11.3 percent to 7.8 percent. During the current expansion it has fallen by more than half. Other labor market indicators also show substantial gains.

Over the past decade, the number of social security beneficiaries has more than doubled.

Over the decade, the government's total public debt has fallen from 30.7 to 14.3 percent of GDP. The foreign public debt has fallen even more, from 25.6 to 9.8 percent of GDP.

Inflation is about where it was 10 years ago, ending the year at 31.4 percent. However it has been falling over the last half year (as measured by threemonth averages) and is likely to continue declining this year in the face of strong deflationary pressures worldwide.

The current situation and challenges:

(click here to view entire press release)

What Effect has 10 Years of Hugo Chávez Had on Venezuela? A Debate

[Francisco Toro, a writer on the anti-Chavez blog 'Caracas Chronicles', and Redmond O'Neil, Vice-Chair of the Venezuela Information Centre (VIC), debate the effects of 10 years of Chavez's presidency.]

What Effect has 10 Years of Hugo Chávez Had on Venezuela? A Debate

February 3th 2009, by Francisco Toro and Redmond O'Neill - Comment is free

::: Francisco Toro to Redmond O'Neill

Venezuelans who understand that democracy means more than just elections have little reason to celebrate today. Ten years into the Chávez era, Venezuela is a more violent, less tolerant and far more divided country than it was. Despite an oil boom that has brought an unprecedented gush of petrodollars, Venezuela's economy is more oil-dependent than ever.

And while the oil boom has brought a much needed decline in poverty, the price we've paid has been the gradual debasement of our democratic institutions, our public discourse, and our capacity to co-exist peacefully, side-by-side, with people whose political ideas we do not share.

Let's be clear: by 1999, Venezuela's democratic institutions had become ossified and corrupt. They were in dire need of reform; nobody sane
would deny that. Rather than reforming them, Chavez has relentlessly
undermined them, purging all but die-hard loyalists from every state
body right up to the supreme tribunal and leaving notionally independent
agencies unable to curb on a hyper-empowered executive. Egged on by a
relentlessly polarising discourse, the Venezuelan state has morphed into
an extension of a single man's will, where every dissenting idea is
presumed treasonous and where only unquestioning submission to the
president's ideology protects you from the increasingly brazen abuse of
state power.

::: Redmond O'Neill to Francisco Toro

Objective discussion of a serious topic requires a thorough examination of the relevant facts. If the facts contradict a theory it must be changed.

For the half century before the election of President Chávez, income per head in Venezuela rose just a quarter of the average rate of the other large Latin American economies. Since the Chávez-led government gained control of the national oil company in 2003, this disastrous economic performance has been transformed, with one of the highest growth rates in the region, a dramatic reduction in debt and an accumulation of currency reserves sufficient to offer significant protection from fluctuations in oil prices.

This economic success has been used to eradicate illiteracy, provide free healthcare to the majority of the population for the first time and radically reduce poverty.

Social progress has been accompanied by a dramatic expansion in democracy with more national electoral contests than virtually any other country in the world and respect for the outcomes, including the defeat of Chávez in last year's constitutional referendum.

(click here to view entire debate)

Chávez Speaks to Social Movements About New Revolutionary Path at World Social Forum

[Social movements in Latin America have been in the “trenches of resistance” against global capitalism, and now need to move to an “offensive,” Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez expressed during the World Social Forum Thursday in Brazil.]

Chávez Speaks to Social Movements About New Revolutionary Path at World Social Forum

January 30th 2009, by James Suggett - Venezuelanalysis.com

Mérida, January 30th 2009 (Venezuelanalysis.com) -- Social movements in Latin America have been in the “trenches of resistance” against global capitalism, and now need to move to an “offensive,” taking concrete steps toward the creation of alternatives to capitalism, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez expressed during a speech to thousands of participants in the World Social Forum Thursday in Belém do Pará, Brazil.

“Just like Latin America and the Caribbean received the biggest dose of neo-liberal venom, our continent has been the immense territory where social movements have sprouted with the greatest strength and begun to change the world,” said Chávez.

Chávez expanded upon the traditional slogan of the World Social Forum, “Another world is possible,” adding, “another world is necessary, and another world is being born in Latin America and the Caribbean!”

(click here to view entire article)

The seeds of Latin America's rebirth were sown in Cuba

[The progressive alternatives to neoliberalism being pursued in Latin America, including in Venezuela, have their roots in Cuba's revolution.]

The seeds of Latin America's rebirth were sown in Cuba

January 29th 2009, by Seamus Milne - The Guardian

On 9 October 1967, Che Guevara faced a shaking sergeant Mario Teran, ordered to murder him by the Bolivian president and CIA, and declared: "Shoot, coward, you're only going to kill a man." The climax of Stephen Soderbergh's two-part epic, Che, in real life this final act of heroic defiance marked the defeat of multiple attempts to spread the Cuban revolution to the rest of Latin America.

But 40 years later, the long-retired executioner, now a reviled old man, had his sight restored by Cuban doctors, an operation paid for by revolutionary Venezuela in the radicalised Bolivia of Evo Morales. Teran was treated as part of a programme which has seen 1.4 million free eye operations carried out by Cuban doctors in 33 countries across Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa. It is an emblem both of the humanity of Fidel Castro and Guevara's legacy, but also of the transformation of Latin America which has made such extraordinary co-operation possible.

The 50th anniversary of the Cuban revolution this month has already been the occasion for a regurgitation of western media tropes about pickled totalitarian misery, while next week's 10th anniversary of Hugo Chávez's presidency in Venezuela will undoubtedly trigger a parallel outburst of hostility, ridicule and unfounded accusations of dictatorship. The fact that Chávez, still commanding close to 60% popular support, is again trying to convince the Venezuelan people to overturn the US-style two-term limit on his job will only intensify such charges, even though the change would merely bring the country into line with the rules in France and Britain.

But it is a response which also utterly fails to grasp the significance of the wave of progressive change that has swept away the old elites and brought a string of radical socialist and social-democratic governments to power across the continent, from Ecuador to Brazil, Paraguay to Argentina: challenging US domination and neoliberal orthodoxy, breaking down social and racial inequality, building regional integration and taking back strategic resources from corporate control.

(click here to view entire article)