,
7 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Should Venezuela’s crisis be taken as a cautionary tale, don't blame it entirely on socialism. It was the authoritarian nature in Chávez what first drove him to power, before he embraced socialism, as an instrument to seize the country.
When Chávez failed his coup, was again defeated when he later preached against voting. He had to participate in a democratic process to be successful.
He never mentioned socialism, but he promised to ‘fry heads’ alluding to Venezuela’s political elites.
He had the support of ‘democrats’, tired of the system, who wanted to teach political elites a lesson. Nobody was talking about socialism, but rather revenge and punishment.
Chávez got the votes not only from the poor. He had the support of economic elites that felt were losing power, as well as media groups that wanted to have more control, and economic groups wanting to increase their share. They were all in for it.
The socialist rhetoric came later, but first was the destruction of the most basic traits of our democracy, our constitution, what attracted much of his supporters.
If anything, Venezuelan crisis should be a teaching moment about the dangers of attempting to overcome dissatisfaction with democracy with its destruction.
