Is Venezuela’s right gaining ground?

THANKS TO Lee Sustar for his excellent analysis of the recent election in Venezuela, which illuminated the multifaceted nature of Venezuelan democracy ("Opposition gains mar Chavista election win"). His article offered a spectacular insight into the elections and provides important information for understanding the current political situation.

First and foremost, more than anything, I believe this election proves the vibrant and stimulating democratic culture within Venezuela. Democratic institutions have been strengthened by the Chávez government and reinforced by popular support.

For instance, there have been 13 electoral contests in the past decade under Chávez, in contrast with 15 for the four decades previously. Venezuela has 85 registered political parties, the most of any Latin American nation. Despite the right's rhetoric about Chávez limiting freedom of the press and other accusations, the media outlets are largely dominated by right-wing, corporate entities who remain hostile to Chávez and the government.

According to a briefing by the Venezuela Information Center before the election, in Venezuela, "Voting will take place using an electronic touch-screen voting machine that will provide every voter with a receipt. This allows the election authorities to conduct a manual recount of the paper receipts if the tally of a particular voting center is challenged." Electronic results are also being backed by a hand count of 53 percent of the machine votes.

In addition, "Venezuela's elections are among the most observed anywhere in the world. At each of the 11,500 voting centers throughout the country, the dozens of parties involved in the election will be entitled to an observer--one example of how at different levels of the electoral process in Venezuela, the opposition can fully participate."

Various agencies (European Union, Organization of American States, Carter Center, etc.) have expressed their satisfaction with the Venezuelan electoral process.

It seems apparent that for activists and those who fight for democracy, we should rejoice at the flourishing democratic institutions in Venezuela. Likewise, it is our job to combat the misinformation and disparaging garbage which the Western press treats Venezuelan democracy, which, in many respects, seems much more advanced and participatory than our own.

Aside from this, something we should consider is not that the right necessary made some sort of huge comeback, but that we are seeing a resurgence of the right-wing, middle-class voters who boycotted previous elections. As the Venezuela Information Center states, "[D]uring the run-up to the previous regional elections in October 2004, much of the opposition called on their supporters to abstain in an effort to discredit the Venezuelan electoral system," mostly because they knew they had no chance of winning.

Because of the international acceptance of the transparency and fairness with Venezuelan democracy, the right had no support for the claim this time. Thus, it seems only natural that, as Lee points out, we see "middle-class sections of the area mobilized to vote." It seems that we should have expected a rise in the right's numbers since, this time, there was no boycott.

There is no doubt that the mounting trash in the streets, crime, inflation and corrupt officials within the Chávez government played a part in lowering satisfaction in key areas such as Caracas. However, we should be careful to not underestimate the power of the influx of right-wing voters, which had previously not participated.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, pointing to the "no" vote within the referendum on constitutional reform at the end of 2007 does not necessarily imply that the right is gaining momentum. Many people, rightfully so, fear handing over enormous amounts of power to the executive and, thus, chose not to vote or voted no for this reason.

The turnout may have been very different had the Chávez government pushed for reforms (a six-hour work day, etc.) without also pushing for a large power shift to the president. It seems apparent that the people of Venezuela are not looking for a Castro, but instead, a continuation of the vibrant democracy they have experienced in the past 10 years.

We see the same process occurring in Ecuador. The new constitution passed, with many reforms and possibilities to help working-class people. Yet of those who voted no, many did so because the constitution gives much more power to the president and executive branch than it had before--not because they were "right-wingers" or disagreed with the social and economic reforms within it.

Speaking with a friend who lives in Quito, he explained his worry to me as being not about what President Correa might do with such power (which he believed would be used for much-needed social services, etc.), but what would happen if a more conservative or right-wing candidate manages to get elected and maintains such broad powers.

So, as Lee points out, the losses in Venezuela of important regions like Miranda are not something to be lightly dismissed. However, simply implying that there was some resurgence of the right and that people are turning to the right for answers due to problems (which existed long before Chávez) may be slightly misleading. The wins in these regions should be, at least in part, attributed to the right actually participating in the elections this time around.

Either way, the lively and exciting democratic process in Venezuela is something that should be defended by activists and progressives abroad--even while criticism of Chávez and the shortcomings of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela should not be off the table.
Derek Ide, Toledo, Ohio