Yankee go home

Human Rights Watch published an unflattering report about civil liberty under President Chávez.  As these things go, the report isn't all that damning.  It basically accuses him of, well, setting up a political machine:  (1) using the executive power of the state to go after political opponents; (2) undercutting the independence of the judiciary; and (3) denying resources to independent or opposition organizations.  It doesn't accuse him of tossing opponents in jail or ending freedom of expression. 

The reaction of the Bolivarian Republic?  Expel the authors.  The irony needs no comment.

Here is an English-language response to the report from the Venezuela government.  Here is an explanation of the expulsion.  Let me point out that the expulsion is entirely legal under Venezuelan law, and that many fully-democratic nations have similar (if seldom used) provisions. 

The HRW report is an interesting read, if you have the time.   

Comments

[Toby]

I always find it funny that those who most decry the supposed "lack of tolerance" for criticism in Venezuela, and lack of "freedom of expression," are also those very same people who censor comments on their blog, and erase any criticism that is voiced. (Yes, Noam, I'm talking to you. You've erased many of my critical comments.)

Very, VERY, ironic coincidence.

The explusion of Vivanco was indeed a very stupid move, but it hardly says anything about the tolerance for criticism of the Chavez government. If you can show me another government on this planet that has put up with the kind of totally viscious criticism in private Venezuela media like Hugo Chavez has for the last 10 years, then please do. Otherwise, just go to Venezuela and turn on the TV, pick up a newspaper, turn on the radio, and you'll clearly see the kind of criticism (unheard of in any other democracy) that Chavez tolerates on a daily basis.

[Jussi Jalonen]

Apples and oranges, Toby. Weblog, even though it may be on public display and allow public participation, is still personal domain and personal property; and I might add that in some countries, the person who's hosting the weblog may actually be held responsible for the contents voiced on the forum.

In other words, weblog is not a _community_ in the same sense as, say, a sovereign state or a civil society is (or at least should be).

As for "other governments on this planet that have put up with the kind of totally vicious cricism like Hugo Chavez has" and the claim that "the kind of criticism that Chavez tolerates on daily basis is unheard of in any other democracy"...

... dude, please. Where do you live? Try visiting the country of my origin, where the ruling government, the opposition and the serving chief executive are not only harshly criticized by the media, but openly _mocked_, on daily basis.

Or, for that matter, check out Britain. Or what the hell, the United States, where the habitual Clinton-bashing and Bush-bashing were pretty much national sports for the past sixteen years.

(Actually, my guess is that this explains a good part of the enthusiasm for Obama. Most Americans want to finally elect someone who is not all that likely to become a butt of jokes or an object of ridicule. And the sad fact is that Obama is not very funny, intentionally or unintentionally.)

Cheers,

J. J.

[Toby]

"... dude, please. Where do you live?"

Um, I have lived in Venezuela, and the US off and on for years. If you think US media criticism is even CLOSE to the level of criticism that Chavez receives in Venezuela, then you have no clue whatsoever, and this discussion should end right there.

But I'll indulge you, and remind you that in before Bush's 2003 invasion of Iraq, EVERY major newspaper in the United States voiced support for it. Every major TV network did the same, blindly repeating all the false claims made by the Bush admin. Is this the kind of criticism you are talking about????

Meanwhile, around the same time in Venezuela, all the private media was working together to actively overthrow the government. In what has been called the "world's first media-coup" the Venezuelan private media orchestrated a media black-out of what was really happening in the capitol, and, in unison, all claimed that Chavez had resigned. They all manipulated footage to try to blame Chavez supporters of shooting innocent civilians. The media owners went down to the presidential palace to greet the coup-leaders and welcome in the new government.

Can you imagine this scenario in the United States? Would the media owners conspire to overthrow the government?

J.J., seriously, get a clue man.

[Jussi Jalonen]

You like shifting ground, Toby, don't you? I'll quote this last gem of yours in full:

"If you think US media criticism is even CLOSE to the level of criticism that Chavez receives in Venezuela, then you have no clue whatsoever, and this discussion should end right there."

How pleasant of you! But of course, your original statement did not actually compare Venezuela and the United States, but rather Venezuela and the rest of the world:

"If you can show me another government on this planet that has put up with the kind of totally vicious criticism in private Venezuela media like Hugo Chavez has for the last 10 years, then please do."

And also, the statement that "the kind of criticism in Venezuela is unheard of in any other democracy".

So, you were actually stating that in Venezuela, the local government's tolerance of media criticism is better than _anywhere else in the world_!

You know, Toby, extraordinary statements require extraordinary proof. So, you were drawing this wonderful conclusion because you've lived in Venezuela and the United States? I've lived in more countries than you, and you don't sound very convincing.

By the way, "the media conspiring against the government" is historically not unheard of in certain European states. But I would hardly describe that as a good indication of the level of "media criticism".

Government coalitions simply tripping over because of unfavourable media coverage is hardly a novelty. Rather, it's perfectly normal for most democratic states. The media says its piece, and people make the decision at a ballot box.

And these days, it's getting international; for example, witness the impact that the Finnish television managed to have on the recent Slovenian elections.

Cheers,

J. J.