Bret, one VP does not a movement make. How many more Venezuelans have to starve or drown before Western conservatives do something more than merely shake their heads?
3
Too bad there is no mention of US fomenting the violence and chaos which has continued since the last US coup failed over a year ago.
2
really? where are the right wingers?
4
Thank you. I am Venezuelan. I am a liberal. Chavez came to power the same way Hitler did. By popular election. He won. Once. I voted against him and cried for a week when seeing the electoral results ( the same way I cried when Trump was elected).
After that, Chavez became a Dictator and a murder and, established the most corrupt government ever in the history of Venezuela. With Maduro, Venezuela's government today is still organized crime, including drug trafficking. Venezuelans keep dying every day while the Sean Penns of the world congratulate the authors of serious crimes against humanity.
14
Venezuela
South America you’ve long gone astray
Choosing bad leaders and now you must pay;
They’re crooks first of all, and oligarchs too;
Equipped to repress with hammer and screw;
They’ve dungeons, of course, with meals of thin gruel,
The hammer, the whip; to resist is uncool;
But no matter, folks, the Yankees don’t care –
It’s South of the Border, no tourists there.
Trump is a hard one to protest dictatorships seems obviously likes some of them. Putin's leadership of Russia comes to mind. Nonetheless, Bret Stephens
is absolutely right about the left's hypocrisy over Venezuela. Democrats need to join Republicans in Congress to demand international intervention. Hollywood human rights activists should be holding Maduro accountable. And academics who spare no mercy for Donald Trump should be condemning Venezuela, holding conferences, sponsoring protests and academic boycotts. They won't of course. If you condemn Venezuela then you really need to condemn Cuba and perhaps Bolivia, Nicaragua and so on. That would be too hard, sort of like Packer fans becoming Patriot fans. They have blinders just like everyone else.
3
Pretty clearly, they don't want yet another war, which seems to be the first reflex of today's Republican party and many Democrats. They're also all too aware that past US involvement in Latin America has usually involved turning a blind eye to the most atrocious things done by dictatorial regimes friendly to the US while claiming that abuses done by leftists were by far the worse things ever committed by anyone in the history of the human race. That is, past US policy in Latin America lacks credibility even among many if not most Americans, and it would be foolhardy to expect a sudden improvement under Trump.
its really ironic that the author is asking where the liberals are when the virus of socialism starts with liberalism and progressively gets worse as the government takes over control of more and more facets of the economy and then the polity as it seeks to suppress its opponents. the very worst regimes in modern history are all on the left. not only does the left end with a dictatorship but it also ends up with an economy in ruins and prisons and mass graves full of murdered opponents.
4
A strange column. Last I checked, Mr. Stephens, the Republicans controlled Congress and the WH and conservatives are riding high. So, why aren't you asking what conservatives and the WH are doing about the problems of Venezuela?
As a liberal, I know that I fear pushing my government into a shooting war in VZ. VZ is certainly a dictatorship and my experience says that campus demonstrations in the United States have zero impact on shameless dictatorships.
Gandhi worked in India and Mandela in S. Africa, because the oppressors of the majorities there still felt shame and they were living in sections of the world in which the oppression was unpopular. VZ has quite a bit of support among LA citizenry and governments -- largely because of a backlash against our stupid Cuba embargo and support for tyrant crackdowns against labor organizers, religious leaders, and workers in nations from Central America to Chile and Colombia.
2
One could respond with the obvious reality that the activist organizations raising the issue about Venezuela are liberal organizations hence clearly highlighting the absurdity of the title.
Or one could simple point out the obvious 'Whataboutism' of the entire article given the current state of the US government.
1
Protesting against Maduro is a bit like protesting Stalin when he was alive. It is not a secret what he is doing. There is no enlightenment that will bring about a change. Everything is in plain view. But sure, you go ahead and be indignant the the liberals aren't protesting a despot, something a conservative would never do. Conservatives like their dictators and they elected one in the US. I suspect any plans for protests will involve our own dear despot. We'll do no good for anyone if Trump can continue with the coup.
Venezuela suffers from oil. That is, they have it. There will be political unrest there until there is no more oil. Conservatives know all about that too.
But hey, I agree, it must be the liberals fault.
3
Maduro is a bad dictator who has been ruining his country's economy, no doubt about it.
However there aren't significant numbers of liberals in Venezuela. The opposition to Maduro and before him Chavez comes from the latisfundistas. When they previously ruled, Venezuelans suffered more and had fewer liberties. Even with the recent damage done by Maduro, Venezuelans still on Average weigh more than before Chavez. That's a useful way to evaluate how a Venezuelan government treats its people, especially since before Chavez enormous oil profits enriched the wealthy obscenely. No wonder the people frequently voted for Chavez.
I will hazard an opinion that if the latisfundistas return to power there will be more killings and fewer liberties, This is not something a liberal would prefer to support. Nor would an actual conservative.
1
"activists generally don’t embrace, at least not in a big way. Cuba’s political prisoners. Islamist violence against Christians in the Middle East. The vast and terrifying concentration camp that is North Korea."
Thia statement is made and then a moral net is thrown over the Left because Maduro is one of them? How totally absurd. Is that why the Left refrains from attacking North Korea?
There are any number of reasons the Left wouldn't have demonstrations against these countries, including the very real chance that inflaming public opinion could very easily lead to military action. But the big point is still the same, the idea that not demonstrating Maduro shows moral weakness on the part of the Left is absurd.
I am a liberal and Venezuela is in the midst of the evolution we went through in Canada at the end of the 20th century.
We in Canada are all Canadians and everyday we still have to confront our racist past. In Venezuela the colour of your skin makes you who you are. When William F. Buckley Sr was forced to move from Mexico to Venezuela in 1917 Venezuela needed a middle class to run a Petro State. Instead of educating the indigenous population to run their society Europeans and Americans were brought in to run Venezuela.
Venezuela is not about capitalism and communism it is about race, democracy and power. It is the same struggle your country is having and for Canadians it is about struggling every day to be true to our professed values. here as in Venezuela it is finally saying that if your ancestors have been here a thousand years or you just arrived yesterday you are one of us.
1
Mr. Stephens criticizes the liberals for lack of protests.
But where are all the conservative protests?
What am I missing?
1
Stephens could also have mentioned how Maduro helped elect the right in Brazil, Argentina, and Chile. The right there essentially said: vote for the left and end up like Venezuela. That was more potent than listening to the whataboutery of American liberals.
2
Why is this not surprising? A minted "conservative" critiquing "the left" because it seems more interested in outrages by what . . . "the right." Which, it strikes me, are rather closer to home. I live in a place that has tried valiantly to avoid the Latin American paradigm of oligarchy on the right and totalitarianism on the left. I do get it. But at this point in American History obsessing about the left in Venezuela is a conservative's dream "divide and conquer" strategy
Thanks, Bret. I think it is important that there is continued reporting on Venezuela and their military helpers, the Cubans. It is not because there is much we can do or should do. It is important because when our own politicians make fantastic sounding promises, that we need to be alert to where they may be taking us. Ten percent of the population has departed, more will leave if they can. The Cuban backed government will keep killing people. This should be a lesson for us all. About all I can see is for us to not fall into the visit Cuba trap. By doing this, we are supporting the death and mayhem in Venezuela.
3
Bret Stephens asks why aren't liberals outraged about Venezuela? I guess conservatives aren't even going to bother pretending to care. The answer to his questions is that we all have only so much capacity for outrage, and right now all of that is focused on our own government and President.
We have our own dictatorship to worry about. And we have the civic tools to do something about it. I can't say the same about our civic powers to effect change in another country.
Mr. Stephens is bright enough to know this, so he should stop trying to appease the right wing with his occasional demonstrations of fealty.
1
Look, as someone who leans left, I have to admit there is some truth to what Stephens says. Initially it seemed that Chavez was a colourful and charismatic, if somewhat autocratic, leader who might wrest his country away from the control of the traditional Venezuelan oligarchs. (Not to mention the first world oil companies.) Regrettably that was not be. Or, at least, Chavez and Maduro simply substituted a new oligarchy for the old. (And the new oligarchs are far worse.) And that's been obvious for the past decade, and perhaps longer.
So, of course, it's embarrassing to admit that you've been conned, and the natural impulse is to close your eyes and go on to something else.
10
The left and right extremists don't truly care about the people of Venezuela as humans, they use the stage to forward their own narrow views. mans inhumanity to man hasn't progressed nearly as far as we like to pretend.
Maduro and his enablers like Sean Penn, Danny Glover , et al have a new cause celebre, undoing the 2016 presidential election. meanwhile, the people of Venezuela will be crushed and starved by their compatriots like Maduro.
4
Remember the dismay of our government when Chavez met with Castro and recall why the Cuban Revolution was fought and how the governments of our nation responded for decades.
Who and what is behind this? Democrats? Republicans? The ideologues and the accomanying philosophers of wealth accumulation? Wealth redistribution?
Maduro, like his predecessor, may not be the cleanest person to lead, but no leader touted as progressive, socialist or communist has ever been supported by our government.
Our government agencies can and probably will continue to follow directives from unidentified business interests who, like the claim levied against Maduro, apparently see little value in thinking beyond a relatively small circle.
It may be our national psyche has always been exploitive.
1
Liberals in America on Venezuela?
People who lean to the left, socialists and at extreme, communists, are strange people. They talk of science over religion, unity of the working class across nations (they are not so much for nationalism as economic unity across nations), and imagine an economic state of equality above cultures.
You would think when a place in the world firmly declares itself socialistic not to mention communistic they would flock to it, because after all, you want to demonstrate success for your idea, not to mention scientific success; you would want to unite wherever it takes hold and make it work.
But do Venezuelan socialists call out to socialists worldwide to help make their society a success? Do socialists in places like the U.S. flock to Venezuela to help make it a success? Hardly if at all. In fact socialists seem not to want to move to places even where socialism has greatest success, such as in Europe. It really is strange, contradictory. As if they prefer to agitate in their own countries but at heart fear their entire belief is false, that it will fail if really put to the test.
You would think by now some of them would be really brave and determined to make socialism work. Instead we have places like Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, China as hardly commendable socialistic states. Maybe some of them can move to Europe, because if not even Europe can give them confidence then they can hardly convince the rest of people in society.
3
I sometimes disagree with Bret but, until now, I have mostly respected the quality of his thoughts and argument. Blaming the liberals for Maduro is not up to the Bret Stephens' standards.
There's plenty of outrage in this bleeding heart liberal's heart for Venuzela. So to for North Korea.
I would dearly love for the United States or some responsible power to go in and boot Maduro out of power. So too Kim Jong Un, if it could be done without annihilating hundreds of thousands of innocent Koreans.
But these are just two despicable miscreants responsible for the misery of their people. There are plenty more. Demonstrating against these tyrants is a waste of time. Only a more muscular approach would solve the problem.
I doubt, though, that the American people would want to get involved. They have enough on their plates as it is.
4
Why aren't there more liberals making noise about Venezuela? Perhaps it's because when your own house is in the process of burning down you're likely to be less concerned about the forest fire six states away.
8
The United States is not supporting the regime in Venezuela and is in fact actively opposing it, so there is obviously less moral urgency for US citizens to protest its corruption and undemocratic measures because we aren't responsible for what's going on. Civil disobedience calls attention to injustices that we ourselves as US citizens and taxpayers bear some responsibility for because our government is involved. Thoreau protested the Mexican–American War, not the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom. So what Stephens considers a failing of liberals actually represents sound ethical behavior, give priority to ending those injustices you bear some responsibility for and can do something about.
3
The main concern of students at this point in time, is probably for their classmates (Dreamers) that are under threat to be sent back to countries that are close to being as poor as Venezuela.
I understand that we should all be concerned about injustices in every country but there was a time when Venezuelans were not concerned about injustice in their own country and that brought them Chavez, because people were tired of being marginalized, hungry and impoverished; maybe students have a point about fighting those injustices here at home.
At the time when Noamy klein, Sean Penn and others were cheering for Chavez I disagreed with them, but they had a point; at the beginning Chavez brought relieve to the living conditions of many Venezuelans but later he became corrupt. The remarks about Klein, Penn and other liberals are out of context.
What is misleading in this article is the suggestion that Mike Pence might be doing anything to help Venezuelans. In my view, Pence, Rick Scott and Marco Rubio are just trying to score political points with Latinos. Venezuela is more than half-owned by Russia and China. I don’t see Pence standing up to Russia here at home, why would he do it when it comes to Venezuela.
Implying that liberals don’t care about Venezuela, but conservatives do is absurd; If those in the right cared at all about Hispanics, Puerto Rico would not be in a situation comparable to the one in Venezuela.
4
This article completely misses the point. We don't care about Venezuela because they voted Chavez and then Maduro into office themselves. And enough continued to support the pair even when it was obvious they were only about power for themselves. Venezuelans have only themselves to blame.
3
"Still, it says something about the moral dereliction of too many liberals that Pence has been a clarion voice of attention and outrage at the unfolding catastrophe, while they mostly remain silent. When you’ve ceded the moral high ground to the Trump administration, you’ve ceded a piece of your soul."
How absurd. Pence declared that serving as Trump's vice-president (as a candidate and now in office) is one of the greatest "honors" of his life. It makes no difference what Trump says or does, Pence's praise is unconditional. Who's ceding pieces of their soul again? Pence's job in the Trump administration is precisely the same as the "Reverends" Fallwell, Jr. and Perkins: to aid and abet Trump's misconduct by providing whatever moral and religious cover they can. That's it. Stephens may find Pence's condemnation of Maduro admirable, but Pence's proximity to Trump makes such condemnation utterly meaningless. Rest assured, if Trump willed it, Pence, Fallwell, Jr. and Perkins would solemnly go on TV and declare a "mulligan" for any of Maduro's many transgressions. Morality wouldn't even register. Pence made his peace with that well over a year ago. With that in mind any of Pence's moral qualms are an effort at manipulation no different than Trump pretending to care about black unemployment in an effort to coerce applause from his critics. As the saying goes, even the devil can quote scripture to suit his purposes (I believe Trump tried it once a well).
7
Look up Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs Chrystia Freeland. There's a Liberal doing something about the Maduro regime.
2
Hey Brett. Do you want to know where liberals are? We are fighting against assault rifles killing children, fighting against a president who thinks Mexicans are rapist and murderers, republicans who only want to line the pockets of their donors and corporations instead of caring for the poor or people without healthcare...
14
Greetings, Comrade Brett! Your portrayal of clueless right-wing troll is so much more subtle than the one Colbert used to do. In secret coordination with Comrade Trump, you and your glorious mustache will soon achieve total destruction of Republican Party.
5
Let it be noted that I deplore Maduro just as much as Mr. Stephens. He has been an unmitigated disaster for Venezuela. But I don't understand his singling out liberals for a lack of outrage concerning this particular situation. I don't hear a lot of conservatives sounding the alarm on this, either. And, as much as I deplore Maduro, the Trump administration has sucked up pretty much all my psychic energy with its assaults on Energy policy, science, free speech, women's rights, immigration, etc. etc.
By all means, I think we should be slapping sanctions on the Maduro government. But we can be pardoned if our attention has been elsewhere.
4
Sorry to hear that it is that bad down there, but they voted their moron in like we did.
7
But then Maduro turned the former democracy into a dictatorship in a slow motion coup, so they cannot vote him out.
We get a chance in 2020.
Voted?
Why the presumption that college protest is mostly a leftist phenomenon? There’s absolutely no research cited in the article to back up that tired old assertion. There are plenty of conservative student groups at colleges and universities. Indeed, some colleges and universities have primarily conservative student bodies. So as long as you are on the Whataboutist wagon, Mr. Stephens, what about taking the conservative university students to task on their lack of concern over Venezuela? The real truth about this situation is that nobody in America gives a damn about Latin America unless it “acts up,” ie, becomes, or threatens to become leftist. Otherwise, and even sometimes then, our national policy on Latin America is “What Me Worry.” Antipoverty initiatives focus on Africa; peace initiatives focus on the Middle East, the Korean Peninsula, Ireland, or whatever the latest hot spot is. Latin America is so far off our national radar that it’s pathetic, right across the political spectrum.
2
I'm not sure what's so difficult to understand. Protest in the US is only worth if it's against US policy. South Africa at the time was considered a strong ally against communism. Israel is considered an ally, various dictatorships have been, and are, supported by the US. There is no point demonstrating against enemies of the US (North Korea, Islamic State, Russia - ok maybe not that one anymore - Venezuela).
4
Maduro running a prosperous country into the ground; Islamist violence against Christians in the Middle East. North Korea. Zimbabwe. ...
... all largely ignored by the academic outrage machine because it does not fit the postcolonial narrative of oppression.
12
I assumed out President was on top of it.
1
Where are the liberals? The liberals are right here, bogged down in a fight to keep our country from suffering a Right Wing Venezuela brought about by the current conservative regime.
3
The liberal indifference to the outrage of the socialist dictatorship in Venezuela is a continuation of a long and shameful trend. When in the 1930s Stalin unleashed a man-made famine on Ukraine, the liberals of the time rushed to defend the “people’s paradise.” When Robert Conquest published “The Great Terror” in the 1970s, he was excoriated by the “progressive” academy. Even today when we know the toll of the socialist dictatorships in the 20th century - the toll that exceeds the Nazi body count - there are still some who defend this ideology. And yes, the USSR was a socialism country, just as Venezuela is today, and Norway is not. Nothing that happens under modern capitalism comes even close to the horrors of the gulags, collectivization, starvation, censorship, ruined lives and destroyed economy that are the legacy of socialism. I challenge any so-called “liberal” to produce reputable historical evidence that contradicts this.
9
Can't think of any US intervention in the last 50 years that didn't start out with a similar 'drumbeat'. Venenzuela is no different.
This time it's Maduro, the 'socialist dictator'.
Any thinking American recognizes the early signs of US warmaking. But we also know from history, US finger waving is more about setting up business for the miltary industrial complex or gobbling up another country's natural resources.
5
Maduro is a classic Latin American caudillo. He is corrupt and authoritarian and murdereous. He lies. Sound familiar, America? This liberal is with Venezuelans, but not with the current government. What to do? What does Stephens propose? An invasion to make Venezuela safe for democracy? I think we've tried that a lot, with pretty bad results.
5
Actually, Bret, this liberal is with ya on this. Why do you stereotype?
2
"How many more American school children have to have to be gunned down before American conservatives do something more than merely shake their heads?"
Fixed it for you Mr Stephens
7
Let me get this straight -- The Times would like me to subscribe to their publication, and with that money they will pay writers like Bret Stephens, who tackle the tough issues of the day -- "Why aren't people talking about Venezuela?"
Dear Bret, Americans can barely find Utah on a map, let alone a foreign country. The reason people fought Anti-Apartheid in the 1980s was because the U.S. did business with South Africa. Some lefty speech by Senn Penn from five years ago that you found doesn't count as the U.S. doing business with Venezuela. Can you name another international cause that has greatly motivated Americans in the last five years (self interest excluded)?
I can't either. Can we have an actual columnist here? Pretty please?
9
The U. S. is a major customer for Venezuelan oil, or was before Maduro ran its oil industry into the ground and it no longer had much to export.
1
I'll tell you what the rel disgrace Mr. Stephens; Not one word from the President or Vice President's mouth about the blatant extra judicial killings in the Philippines that the Duerte regime hardly even bothers to cover up.
6
The lead article in the latest (March 8) issue of the liberal New York Review of Books is a devastating critique of the Maduro regime by Enrico Krauze.
1
The real education is from comments on the op-ed. Liberals crying there is no time to protest -forget about invading Venezuela- because our own country is a mess. If so, my darling liberal commenters who trash Mr. Stephens, why do you still have time to demand Israel pull out of the West bank, stop blocking seaport access to Gaza, "return" millions of Palestinians who were never born there but have hatred towards Jews brimming in their eyes. All of these "noble" intentions without mentioning the thousands of terrorist attacks, Hamas determination to obliterate every Jew in Israel first, and that they demand all of Israel, not a two state solution.
I am upset that President Trump cannot admit we have no real gun control in our country, that we fail our children, and all our citizens. Where are the protests against easy access to lethal weaponry? No, our colleges, which once protested a wasted war in Vietnam, have become sanctuaries mostly for the anti-Israel crowd, occasionally smearing whites for their privilege. Privilege, when they are gunned down in school?
7
Neo-Cons get even more desperate for whatever uppity perch they can find to look down on "Liberals" when they feel bad. Its an obvious Freudian defense mechanism spurred by yet another bad outcome of long time right wing "goals". This gun week was not a good choice and unfortunate timing. No matter how bad you feel about your Republican responsibility for these repeated horrors, to "tag Liberals" just now is poor form....and isnt going to help anybody.
And how many Filipinos have to die before conservatives do (or even say) anything at all?
5
Ahhh.."Whataboutism". The go to for the morally bankrupt conservatives who don't want to face the idiocy their ideology has brought the U.S.
4
Well, I am one liberal who thinks Maduro should be arrested and sent to jail for the rest of his life.
I also believe that if Lopez Obrador wins the next election in Mexico we will likely see a Maduro-like collapse of the Mexican economy.
I agree that far too many young liberals do not realize that far more people have been murdered under the name of socialism (Mao, Lenin/Stalin, Pol Pot) than fascism (Hitler, etc.).
4
My oh my, so much "whatabouttism" in the comments. So much deflection.
"How many more Venezuelans have to starve or drown before Western liberals do something more than merely shake their heads," you ask, Mr. Stephens?
I think half of the population of Venezuela could starve or drown -- or be massacred in the streets by the jackbooted thugs of Maduro -- and still you would not hear a peep from the liberals.
In fact, I expect the liberals to oppose Temporary Protective Status for Venezuelan refugees.
Probably because they know in their hearts that every Venezuelan refugee who has lived under Chavismo and Madurismo and their children will vote for freedom and civil and economic liberties for 50 years. And we can't have that, can we?
1
Mr. Stephens. Please have your next OpEd article be titled "On Trump, Where are the Conservatives?". No double spaced lines either
4
Actually this author has a bunch of incisive articles on exactly the topic you’re suggesting.
4
The liberals are trying to avoid Venezuela's fate, the destruction of our own democracy from within.
4
Conservatives are in power in all three branches of government. Tell me, Bret..exactly what are conservatives doing to productively deal with Venezuela? With all the levers of power in your grasp, why aren't you doing something besides endlessly whining about liberals?
Perhaps that is the only thing conservatives are really good at.
3
It's like Democrats always have to be the mean parent supervising the kids because the expectations for Republicans are so low.
Is this the best you can do ? SAD.
4
I love Stephens but I don't understand why he leaves the need to protest up to Liberals. Where is Michael Savage, Mark Levin, Rush, Hannity, Ingrahm et, al?
Guess they're too busy lying every day to defend Chump.
3
Where are liberals?
We are engaged in our own life and death struggle for our own democracy here at home with the GOP, the most malevolent gang of mimes I have ever witnessed.
3
Sorry Brett -- explain again why the cause of freeing Palestine is "perennially unworthy," and why you put "freeing" in scare quotes? Sounds like you're in favor of Palestine being perennially un-free. What's up with that, please?
5
Interesting variation on the theme of "whataboutism" that has so infected conservatives these days. Incapable of actually addressing the ongoing destruction of our democracy by their political party they grope about for something, anything with which to distract their fevered minds from the horror of their own making.
Got news for you Stephens, liberals are pointing out daily what is happening in your own country but you just plug your ears, shut your eyes and chant "whatabout? whatabout?"
4
Mr. Stephens,
Every conservative knows that socialism in any form is pure evil. And that is why I do not understand why young conservatives on college campuses are not trying to free burdened Europeans and Australians and (even more worrisome, because they are in our hemisphere) Canadians from the horrors of health care, maternity leave, paternity leave and virtually free education. The horror! But you should know why, you should be able to explain the silence. Pray tell.
8
Isn't the real purpose of your question to imply that your side is the morally superior one, and therefore everyone on the other side should either agree with you, or do penance, or both?
Isn't all this just another way of saying: "we're conservatives, and the other side is wrong"?
What's that? You're saying that your point is to expose hypocrisy? Well isn't that ultimately the same thing? Am I supposed to become a conservative because Glen Greenwald isn't more outraged about Venezuela?
If your point isn't simply to one-up someone, then tell us what YOU'RE doing about Venezuela. Forget listing the usual suspect-hypocrits (so you can bash them), and tell us what YOU think should be done.
IE. instead of fomenting polarization, think about a useful contribution you could make to a problem.
3
Stephens at his best can be well worth reading, especially his anti-Trump stance. However, he simply must rip liberals periodically. All people are imperfect, but Stephens at his worst is a cherry picker par excellence. Preaching about moral lapses on the left by a conservative is pure hypocrisy considering the state of the Republican Party.
The most far left points of view, like Counterpunch, are blind about terrible abuses in once or current Marxist countries, as Stephens says, but the most far right points of view are pure malicious fantasy like Alex Jones, Limbaugh in recent years, and Hannity et al.
Be a fair and balanced accuser, Mr. Stephens.
3
We liberals are not ceding any ground, Mr. Stephens.
Rather, we have had to focus on our own backyard. It seems that the conservatives have gone stark raving bonkers and are threatening our way of life right here in the good ol' USA..
That is YOUR party's doing, sir.
Physician, heal thyself. Then we can talk.
6
This center-left guy has no love for Chavez. Most of us don't. Mr. Stephens has to reach out into far left field to find two actors and a writer who said something good about about Chavez once or twice a decade ago. This is pure straw man tactics, nothing more.
As for why there is not a lot of campus activism against Chavez like with South Africa and Darfur? Perhaps it is because we don't have an economic solution like South Africa or a military won like Darfur. Activists aren't dumb, they focus on issues where they can make a difference.
Venezuela's problems are real, but they are not primarily caused by America, and they couldn't be primarily solved by America. It makes absolute sense to focus on cleaning up our own house instead. Perhaps instead of taking pot shots at the oppositions, Stephens can focus on the horror show that is Trump and his enablers in the Republican party.
1
Where are the conservatives on Trump?
Or more to the point of Mr. Stephen's thinly-veiled exercise in diversionary "Look out, behind you!" where are conservatives on a Venezuelan crisis decades in the making that's rooted in Republican and corporate propping of Venezuelan dictator General Marcos Pérez Jiménez who presided over Venezuela's rise from a colonial banana republic to the 4th largest oil producer in the world. Like most oil oligarchs, General Perez Jimenez protected a greed-crazed economic jet set oil elite that hoarded oil wealth while basic social needs and economic fairness were ignored. When the inevitable social unrest exploded, Perez Jimenez didn't hesitate to brutally repress political dissidents, with all the identifying markings of clandestine US support.
Chavez is a direct measure of the immense breadth and depth of popular rejection of the US-backed oil oligarchy and General Perez Jimenez' brutal dictatorship. Republican policy supporting repression and oil elites insured a powerful nationalism that views Uncle Sam as the devil incarnate.
Mr. Maduro is a clueless, amateur dictator designed and produced by Republican foreign policy that limits what options Democrats have to work with.
I suppose Mr. Stephens is fine with Trump's threat of military intervention in Venezuela, which is where his side is on.
Right now, not just liberals, but all cognizant Americans are focused on Trump's corrupt regime.
The question is where's Mr. Stephens?
3
The suffering of Venezuela isn't or shouldn't be a politically left or right cause. It is a human tragedy.
Venezuela, under Hugo Chavez, began to deteriorate under the guise of a "Socialist Revolution". Any ability of the United States to affect the conditions there were squashed when, in September 2002 under President George W. Bush, supported a military coup which failed.
Hugo Chavez, determined to "create a worker's paradise" in Venezuela, used the power of his office to remake Venezuela into an economic basket case it's become. His successor, President Maduro has continued on the Chavez path towards dictatorship & destruction of the economy.
Contrary to many conservative commentators, liberal ideas are not Socialism.
In many cases Socialism & Liberalism are on different sides of issues (while there are some areas where there are similar approaches to problems facing a nation).
But I digress...
To Bret Stephens I say, your column isn't addressing the issues of Venezuela. It is lecturing "liberals" on what you believe is their moral failing.
The truth be told, it is all of our moral failing not to do more to help the Venezuelan People.
But since we have a Republican administration & Congress, I say to you, where are your voices to help Venezuela?
5
I really love the way the radical right, as exemplified in the 30+% who support the current occupier of the Oval Office, are so gleeful in their caustic characterization of anyone who doesn't toe their particular belief structure. "If you aren't one of us, you must be one of those radical leftist liberals."
Fact is, not every liberal is a leftist, and obviously (viz. Maduro, et al.) not every leftist is a liberal. It's past high time for the right to understand who they spend so much time opposing in tweets, Facebook, comment sections, and certainly, columns like this.
Had Mr. Stephens held off a bit on his very evident hatred of anything not-right, and spent a little time ruminating on just why liberals (and most Americans, in fact) haven't spent much energy on the tragedy that is Venezuela, he would have realized that indeed, we have much ore urgent issues here inn the US. Like so many others here have posted, our energies are better spent at this time on addressing the horrific destruction of The State here at home. At every turn, this "administration" has demonstrated a lack of moral center, of compassion for our citizens- and others who would aspire to be, and of well, just plain old-fashioned competence.
With that much on the other 60+% of the American public's plate, how can we turn our attention to another country's horror show, when we have one unfolding right here at home?
1
Great observation. I admit to having a skateboard in the 80s that had an "End Apartheid Now" sticker on it and going to "Stop the Death Squads in El Salvador "rallies at the University of Washington. I had heard what seemed like positive things Chavez had done during the late 1990s. But things change! This has turn into a humanitarian crisis. I was just in Colombia last month and it's a big deal the refugees pouring in and the suffering while the bond holders continue getting paid. How the fortunes of nations can change on a dime or a coupon. Colombia is doing well now and Venezuela is in the pits. But as we now grapple with other countries meddling in our internal politics with a tyrannical leader in charge, it's hard to see Trump and Pence as having the moral authority of our founding fathers!
2
Mr. Stephens has a great talent for kicking the fire ant mound; you can tell it from the fury with which most of the comments try to get back at him.
From all the excuses and pseudo-justifications for leftist hypocrisy, the gold goes to a brand new one: “we’re too busy fighting the evil Trump at home; no time for starving Venezuelans (or for imprisoned Cubans, just as in the last 50 years)”.
3
Brett Stephens, is completely correctly, and I would be the first to admit it. Liberals like me should stand against dictatorship, from the right or left.
To excuse such malfeasance with lame laments amount all the work we're doing here resisting Trump and the GOP is weak. Is it so hard to walk and chew gum and the same time?
4
We have our own "leadership" in this country that ignores check and balances and the law generally. America First, right?
"Left" like "Right", comes in degrees. Just because you vote Democratic doesn't mean you'd vote for Maduro because he is also to the left, (but far too FAR to the left. Or that you'd vote for Trump because you also support things center-right . . . that is, unless you're a modern Republican who just mechanically pulls the R lever.
The Democratic Party is on the left?
2
very true ! Thank you for pointing out the bias
1
What makes you think that American "liberals" have anything in common with Nicholas Maduro? Your one-dimensional reasoning is unsurprising given that you still call yourself a conservative in this day and age. Unfunny how conservatives desperately look for corrupt basket cases like Venezuela and Cuba and equate them with liberalism. It appears that you never looked up the meaning of the word "liberal": one who is open to new ideas, freedom of thought and expression, and supports basic human rights. These ideals are of course diametrically opposed to Venezuelan or Cuban regimes, but why would you make that connection?
Modern conservatives rely on non-stop misinformation and deception to keep the uninformed voting for them, so why would I expect anything else from you? I got nothing.
2
Oh, here we go again. Look, Bret, just because we don't spend every waking moment protesting something happening elsewhere doesn't mean we accept it or agree with it.
It's not really about left vs right, it's about competence vs incompetence. Look, Venezuela is a terrible situation, caused by incompetent management. In case you haven't noticed, we have incompetent management in this country now.
Since you insist on playing this game repeatedly, tell me where are the right-wing protest against right-wing theocratic states like Israel or Saudi Arabia?
2
We should be worrying more about the Venezuelans and less about DACA. They are in dire straits and we should be assisting them with food and supplies. Humanitarian aid is very much needed at this time. This madman of a dictator must be stopped and he looks so evil. He is a monster and I feel so sorry for the people who have nothing. We must not stop until they have received relief.
Instead of outrage at liberals - for not being outraged at Maduro enough - how about being outraged at the current - Republican - government for not doing ANYTHING to help the people of Venezuela. Again - the PEOPLE of Venezuela. Because, over there it is the population at large who is suffering, not their leadership. That is what the "S.O.S. Venezuela" was presumably about. Not saving Maduro.
But if you want to talk hard politics, it was the Government action, not the activists outrage, that brought results - South Africa, Balkans, Darfur.
There are ways that U.S. could help the humanitarian side of the crisis. The sanctions are only paying lip service and - as stated - help Maduro stay in power longer.
However, this is actually a thinly-veiled attempt at discrediting the campus dissent on Israel/Palestine relations. Even if you dismiss the BDS movement, the problem and the current Israeli solution to it deserves to be filed under any and all of the crisis mentioned - violence against Christians in Mid-East, Cuba’s dissidents, North Korea's prison camps, Venezuela's starvation.
If you can discredit the left on Venezuela, you have discredited them on Palestine.
Cheap.
1
I'm a baby blue liberal social democrat so of course I identify with non-democratic socialists rather than social democratic liberals. Better dark blue than pink. Or something like that. Not.
1
"Jeremy Corbyn, who could yet be Britain’s next prime minister, memorialized the late dictator Hugo Chávez in 2013..."
This is the sort of editorializing that has the left wondering, "do conservatives have a functioning brain?"
Chavez was elected and re-elected four times by a majority of Venezuelan voters in elections that were deemed fair by the international community. So unless Stephens has a new definition of "dictator" that he would like to share with us, we are left to ponder the question I posed above.
If you were getting your news and views on Chavez from the corporate media, you need to widen your perspective. Here is a good start:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/03/why-us-dcemonises-...
5
I think you are way off in your belief that liberals have always looked at Venezuela as some kind of model progressive state. You are mixing it up with Sweden and the other Scandinavian countries that continue to prosper and have the world's happiest people. All of us, liberals and conservatives, should be speaking-up against what is going on in Venezuela, but, unfortunately, our own wannabe dictator is our first priority.
2
In response to Alex Kent and his statement that Yes, there were the wealthy few in Venezuela - and that hasn't changed - but what Chavez's policies did for the poor decimated the middle class and, in the process, the economy. Sean Penn et. al, happened to overlook this. Bret Stephens is correct about his assessment that more liberals, especially those who supported Chavez, start speaking out about what is happening there. For one, people are starving because Maduro will not let aid organizations help. Any food that is delivered is stolen by the military. It's impossible to transfer money in through traditional means. I have an inside view as my sister in law is Venezuelan and most of her family lives there. Her brother was part of the resistance and was able to escape. He would have been killed if he had been caught. It's about time someone speak up but, though Mr Stephens is right about liberal complacency, there also needs to be more outrage from the right too. Or, instead of chunking us into left and right, maybe we should start thinking as a country and say the all AMERICANS should be speaking out.
6
Your post is full of misinformation. Please read:
http://cepr.net/blogs/the-americas-blog/venezuelan-economic-and-social-p...
2
I cannot say that Brett is completely wrong here. It is worth pointing out, however, that the energy of the Left in America is largely geared to doing what we can to ensure the continuation of our democratic republic from the scourge of Trump. As our political system is now controlled from top to bottom by the Reactionary Right, saving ourselves, unfortunately, now has to take precedence over campus campaigns in support of those unfortunates in other nations.
2
If foreign affairs protests were all based simply on the morally reprehensible policies of particular countries, Mr. Stephens's suggestion of moral hypocrisy or worse on the part of students regarding Venezuela and other the other examples he gives would be more convincing. But most of the student protests that I lived through in the 60s and observed in subsequent decades have mainly (though perhaps not exclusively) tended to be focused on matters in which the United States's own actions or support (or the actions of United States corporations) were directly implicated.
For better or worse, past protests have been aimed at persuading the United States to stop propping up dictatorships against populist insurgencies, as, for example, in Nicaragua and Chile. Or at persuading U.S. corporations to stop investing in particular countries that violated human rights. There have been plenty of instances where liberal students have been mortified by the conduct of foreign dictatorships (such as the Soviet puppets in Hungary and elsewhere) while viewing U.S. intervention as unwise, as opposed to situations where the U.S. is already involved. Genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia may be exceptions that prove the rule.
For those of who who are saying that apathy toward Venezuela is because we're distracted by Trump--this is only partially true. I first went to Venezuela in 2002 and the apathy was strong then, too. My American friends were vaguely aware that their gas prices were going up because something was happening in Venezuela, but they didn't know or care about how drastically life in Venezuela was changing.
As to why Americans aren't taking to the streets, why should they? Protests are most successful when the demands are clear, and frankly, I don't see any way for the United States to intervene that wouldn't make a bad situation worse. What should we do, undermine yet another democratically elected (according to him) Latin American leader? That didn't go so well in the 80s. Should we boycott oil? Not gonna happen and it would almost certainly have unintended consequences. Watching Venezuela over the past 16 years has been like watching car crash in very slow motion. I don't see any way of making things better short of a Venezuelan Spring, which would be undermined by US involvement. The best thing we can do, I think, is be welcoming to Venezuelan refugees.
Side note for those of you using Venezuela as an example of why the left is wrong: you're way off base and you know nothing about Venezuela. Ideology is only a small part of a regime. This is much more complicated than a question of left or right, and even if it was, left and right mean very different things in Venezuela.
1
What steps has the Trump Administration and the GOP taken on Venezuela? None.
What good would college protests in this country do?
None.
What connection do American college kids have to what is going on in Venezuela?
None.
What is the chance that your column will successfully switch our focus from
Trump's failed foreign and domestic policy in Washington to a situation in Venezuela that is neither caused by the US nor within our control?
None.
1
I'm a fairly liberal guy, I guess. I doubt anyone's a bigger critic of socialism, not even you. But you're right. And it's basically because socialism promises so much on behalf of those with so little, as you know. Although, has any philosophy in the history of the world ever deviated more between what it promises on paper and what it delivers in practice?
The best thing to do is to continue trying to teach young people not only how market systems produce prosperity and how they are tied to individual freedoms, but also how the principles of socialism lead, of necessity, to horrific outcomes. In other words, leftists think that Proper Socialism hasn't been attempted and that Soviet-style systems are a result of contingencies, not of principles. And every time a Chavez-type figure comes along, they hold their collective breath and wish upon a star: "Maybe this time it'll work!"
Imagine if you thought that capitalism was the most evil thing in the world, that it was totally exploitative and designed to keep the rich rich and the poor poor, and facilitated the triumph of greed over compassion and charity and so forth. If you thought all of that, it would be only natural that you, too, would be part of this breath-holding crowd. It'll do no good to point out socialism's failures in practice; we must combat it in theory.
1
Bret - I have been agreeing with you more- in the age of Trump-but why to politicise this tragedy? - The problem is that the left is fragmented now- more than any time since the Vietnam War. The far left adheres to politically correctness, as far as Venezuela and Israel are concerned for instance, but the majority of Democrats are not from this group. There is a wide swath of opinion
The danger is not from the left with a populist demagogue like Chavez ( and now his descendants). it is the corruption of political institutions and protections and the naked lust for power. This group will not solve the problems necessary for the survival of the society.
They are not repairing the oil refinery machinery that would allow them to pay for their government and feed their people. Refineries are at about 20% capacity. That is suicidal. Populism seems poor at long-term solutions to problems, whether from the left in Venezuela or from the right here in the US
The history of Venezuela democracy is not good. Government for the last hundred years there has been a license to steal. Who does that remind you of?
1
I don't believe it is even remotely possible to "cede the moral high ground" to Trump's administration. So don't imply that it is, Mr. Stephens. That's just posturing for effect.
Your point about Venezuela is well taken, of course. So is the Left's ignoring of this issue misplaced emphasis - is the Venezuelan situation isomehow more important that the crisis for democracy happening in our own country ? No, it is not. Once again, not even remotely so.
This misplaced emphasis is your own, Mr. Stephens. You have a point, but it's just not a very important point. That the Left, just as the Right, chooses its favorite hobby horse to ride isn't news, and never will be news. At the moment, the Left's focus is where it should be.
Mr. Stephens's column fails to mention that the election of the Chavez-Maduro regime was a desperate attempt to correct an extreme imbalance in wealth and opportunity between a tiny class of owners in Venezuela and the vast majority of the People. That said, if the Left here is silent about the thuggish behavior and mismanagement of that regime as the author alleges, that is a tragedy. We have only to look at how much of the Left in America lost its moral authority in the 1940s through the 50s by refusing to criticize the dictatorial, inhumane behavior of Stalin in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Trampling on human rights is wrong no matter what banner the perpetrator carries.
By framing this as Liberal vs Conservative, Stephen dances around the real issue: corrupt governments channelling the resources to the chosen few.
1
I would suggest that the answer as to why there is not more US left-wing focus on Venezuela is a simple one: the American left if focused on what it sees as more urgent matters at home. Stephens seems like a clever fellow - I have a hard time believing this didn't occur to him.
The current US administration is, among other things, pursuing a xenophobic path on immigration, dismantling our safety net, pursuing policies that exacerbate our already gaping inequality, and selling our public lands to the highest bidder.
Moreover, one of our federal agencies - ICE - is functioning in a way that is exceedingly cruel (literally breaking up families), and is running inhumane detention centers for immigrants that would be a shame on this country if this country still had a moral compass. It is not an exaggeration to say that we now have our own equivalent of the unaccountable secret police forces that South American strongmen once possessed.
This is in addition to our sky-high incarceration rate - the highest in the world; worse than N Korea or Venezuela - and the fact that our police forces operate with virtual impunity from all kinds of wrongdoing, including the killing of innocents.
And to top it off, our president is using his office to enrich himself.
Why focus on the "third world," when we are becoming the third world in real-time?
2
Bret, you're right about Venezuela and the progressives earlier embrace of Chavez, who was nothing other than another dictator, irrespective of his chosen form of government. But it's hard to embrace what Mike Pence is saying about Venezuela when he, Trump, and the rest of Republicans in Congress don't seem to care one whit about Puerto Rico, which is populated with Americans.
2
Hear Hear! As a liberal and the daughter of a Venezuelan, I applaud the truths expressed here. One of my Venezuelan cousins sent me a video yesterday of Trump making a speech, actually, reading a speech, saying the same things Bret Stephens says in this piece. A dictator is a dictator, except that "socialist" dictators often seem to be so much more thorough in their oppression. Liberals should be ashamed to leave the defense of the Venezuelan people to the likes of Trump and Pence. I have noticed that this newspaper shares in this fault - there is almost never anything actually criticizing the Castros, for example, or their like printed here. This piece is the exception.
31
No, socialist dictators are not more thorough in their oppression. For one thing, if they are dictators, they aren't socialists, but in any case, dictators are bad across the board. You are aware of the atrocities committed by right-wing regimes throughout Latin America, right? It's all bad; useless, inflammatory comments about one being worse than another do not help.
1
I wonder what Trump thinks about this? Or Paul Ryan?
The "liberals" are very worried that years and years of progressive legislation right here in our own are being destroyed by a know nothing megalomaniac, backed by Republicans jubilant at the prospects of destruction, many of whom will not cooperate with Democrats. It is looking as if we have almost no effect on national policies - forget about international policies. That may be the core problem in the lack of outcry about Venezuela.
3
Mr. Stephens should forever recuse himself from espousing his views on the Israli-Palistinian dispute. With his statement "And then there's the perennial--and perennially unworthy -- cause of "freeing" Palestine", he disqualifies himself as an unbiased bystander on this issue. If I were a Palestinian and watched the Israeli destroy my olive grove to make room for a settlement, road or wall, I would consider my cause very worthy. As an unbiased US citizen, I also consider it very worthy to support that Palistinian farmer in his struggle realizing that my only weapon is the ballot box.
Why was Bret Sephens hired by the NYT when it was known that he is an uncritical supporter of anything that Israel does. He was also one of the greatest booster of our decision to attack Iraq in 2003.
As for Venezuela, what would he have the Liberals do to overthrow Moduro? Attack? Strange he has not suggested that the US attack but is always suggesting that we have our armed forces involved in the Middle East.
8
Where are the liberals? Well, Bret, We're organizing to put checks and balances on Donald Trump by electing Dems in 2018. Invading Venezuala is not on our short list. We're cleaning our own House first. (Pun intended)
9
Wow, you really listed the murder's row of liberals right there in the US. Danny Glover. Sean Penn. Jeremy Corbyn.
If we indulge your premise, that liberals must defend every terrible outcome from what you perceive to be their goals, I suggest that you defend every person who dies of preventable diseases for lack of healthcare, the countless numbers of people who've gone bankrupt from medical bills. Why so silent on Americans paying more for healthcare with worse results?
Your premise is comically stupid and willfully obtuse. And that you're supposed to be among the best conservatives have to offer for evidence based policy advocacy, well, that says.
10
As a progressive I never supported the governments in Venezuela. This is a misconception on the part of Stephens. Just because there aren't nationwide protests in the US against the Venezuelan regime should not be interpreted as condoning the anti-democracy actions of the Venezuelan government. The right always interprets the lack of progressive response as tacit approval. The government in Venezuela is not really leftist as much as it is authoritarian which are two very different things although the right doesn't see it that way. I agree the US should be doing what it can to support the average Venezuelan and work with other South American governments to oust the regime in Venezuela.
9
Granted that the situation in Venezuela is deplorable but most of us are focusing on the real collusion of the Republican Party with a President colluding with a foreign enemy that a few high profile politicians and journalist carrying water for Maduro.
5
Some people are actually able to do two things at a time, especially when they claim to fight for a better world, and we’re talking about serious issues.
1
Coming from one of those Southern countries, let me tell you that your mistake is to confuse liberals with real leftists.
For example Mauricio Macri, the Argentinean president, is the RIGHT there. Look at his platform and his government. He is to the LEFT of Bernie Sanders.
So liberals were with Chavez while he started going left. But then they couldn't go on because left became, as usual, dictatorship (that it is the same, regardless of it started on the right or the left). Under those circumstances is not that they don't protest because Maduro is leftist. It is because it is just another dictatorship...
6
The author makes a good point, one which the campus left ought to embrace. He should also ask why the right wastes its outrage against false issues such as the 'war on christmas' or other such nonsense. If the Young Republicans were to ask the Young Democrats to join them in a bi-partisan march against Venezuela, they might find some common ground. Of course the young Republicans would worry that they will never get one of the Koch Brothers financed political jobs upon graduation because they had made peace with the real enemy; the Democrats. Of course the Kochs don't mind buying Venezuelan oil, so maybe that is why their minions on campus are so quiet.
6
I would like to see some sort of mea culpa on Venezuela by people I otherwise respect deeply, including Chomsky, Klein, and Corbyn. I'll try to do it for them.
I think they all supported Chavez because he seemed to be upending the old Latin American order of extreme inequality and institutions of, by, and for the plutocrats, backed by the US. It should have been obvious early on that he was just another caudillo using left-wing rhetoric, but people who wanted a fairer society painted their hopes onto him.
Then the right-wing coup attempt in 2002, and the way that the Venezuelan opposition and the US government embraced the coup leaders for the one day that they appeared to be in power, helped to confirm to leftists that Chavez was the true democrat facing down an anti-democratic opposition who would love to see a Pinochet figure in power. It also made Chavez more paranoid and authoritarian himself.
Chavez, for his part, used elections and referenda to legitimate his rule. In the 2000s, it was less obvious that electoral authoritarianism was going to be the biggest political winner of the early 21st century. Each time he made the state less liberal, he did it to majorities at the polls. So they could keep up the notion that he was an Allende-style democratic socialist rather than a Peron-style populist strongman.
The democratic left needs to learn from its mistakes and develop antibodies against the authoritarian left. Chavez/Maduro would be a good place for us to start.
3
Where are liberals? They're busy here in the U.S. trying to save their own country from the right wing radicalism that masquerades as modern day conservatism.
6
U.S. companies and universities are not doing business in Venezuela. That is typically what campus protests target, such as with the protests against American companies and entertainers doing business in South Africa during Apartheid. But it's not true that we aren't paying attention. I've spoken with my children about what's going on there and about the failures of socialism. Venezuela is now going to need a massive international bailout, which won't happen until there is a completely new government in charge. I feel for the people there. Perhaps instead of fleeing those millions of Venezuelans should force Maduro out- nothing will change until that happens. Things will only get worse.
3
The moral outrage that he attributes to left-wing folks (I'm center left but abhorred Chavez and resent being thrown in Stephens' blanket condemnation) is now directed at our own Maduro. That's why criticism to Maduro's tyranny is muted.
4
Amusing how many on the right associate the left with dreaded socialism. It might surprise them to know that the only candidate in the 2008 election who actually was not born in the U.S. is John McCain, born in the Canal Zone, a very successful American experiment in perfect socialism. Turned out to be a wonderfully utopian society. Ask anyone who lived there.
2
It's laughable that Stephens tries to connect the disaster in Venezuela with American "liberals."
I think that if you polled a group of 100 Americans anywhere, not even one person (liberal or conservative) could name the current president there, could identify the country on a map and, frankly, could care less about the politics or misery there.
Mr. Stephens, instead of concentrating your misguided (and dishonest) criticism on liberals, perhaps you should start worrying about the dismantling of your own republic.
6
I lived in Bolivia and wrote about on Latin American politics for 19 years, challenging the World Bank, the IMF, global corporations and the other powers so unpopular on the left. The problem is that global left gets attached to these Latin American leaders as if they are saints instead of politicians, and then acts like questioning them is some form of treason to the cause. Maduro isn't a socialist, he is a despot. Who cares what label he pretends to bear? Any politician who lets his people starve, or die for lack of medicine, or who jails opponents as if it were habit is not an ideologue of any stripe. He is a good old fashioned power monger for his own sake. None of us who support the progressive change that is so important in Latin America should be timid for calling things for what they are in Venezuela today. Punto.
7
A sad effort, as is becoming all too common from all sides, to try and blame the other side, in this instance the "liberals," for ills in the world that they bare no responsibility. Like many Americans, I don't have much spare time to protest bad political regimes and to let the world when I am outraged. And while my views are mostly center-left, I have no sympathy and express no support for dictators like Perez and Maduro. Bad is bad, regardless of left or right, and I have disdain for all the tyrants out there, whether it be Jong Un, Assad, Erdogan, Putin or any others out there striving in that direction. There, I've done more than shake my head - and probably just as much as you, self-righteous Mr. Stephens.
3
Mr. Stephens has run out of column ideas already? The best he can do is point fingers at the "moral dereliction of too many liberals"? And Sean Penn and Danny Glover are supposedly leaders of the left? Who anointed them? What are conservatives doing about Venezuela? And what exactly is the Puppet Pence doing about Maduro? People from all political affiliations have long decried some of the policies of Chavez and Maduro. A primary complaint was not investing petroleum profits to create a more diversified economy. And in case Mr. Stephens has forgotten, people of this nation who identify with the left, center-left and center-right have a more immediate concern: protecting our country from the crude narcissist, sexual predator, schoolyard bully, white nationalist supporter, pathological liar and unrelenting megalomaniac who currently occupies the White House.
3
By definition, whoever Mike Pence is against is probably someone Liberals should support. The Mike Pence’s of the world are just as or probably more responsible for the conditions in Venezuela.
Let me also add Marco Rubio in there.
2
Oh, Bret, what contortions you had to go through on this one! Somehow Venezuela's failed leftist autocracy and economic collapse should be laid at the feet of those pesky left-leaning university students because the didn't jump up and down enough. Really, that's your thesis??? I like to keep informed on a wide range of perspectives, and I read a number of commentators across the political spectrum, but you wasted my time today with this one. As others have already noted here in the comments, there are plenty of legitimate reasons why Venezuela (or Poland or Turkey or several other countries) don't get as much attention as they probably should--mostly because we have an autocratic wannabe sitting in the White House.
5
Venezuela is a predominantly Catholic and Christian country and most liberals want nothing to do with religion. I met a lovely Christian couple recently from Venezuela and they have relatives still there and they asked me to pray for their survival.
The people are starving and in a terrible way and I am glad Mike Pence, a devout Christian, is taking the lead and assisting in their plight. The Obama administration did practically nothing and this is a stain on the Democrats. Shame on them and congratulations to the Republicans for taking this very important step. They are desperate and we must help in any way we can.
2
It's hard to expend energy on something that's happening in another country when you are powerless to influence it. The Republicans control all the branches of government now.
Why waste time worrying about Venezuela, when the first order of business must be to throw Trump, the chief liar and scoundrel, out of power, along with all his unprincipled enablers.
Then we'll see if anything can be done about Venezuela.
3
Mr Stephens, part of the problem may be that the NYT seems to have the same focus of attention as many of these campus liberals. You cite articles which have appeared in the Times in 2016 as examples of how Venezuela has been receiving adequate attention in the press. The reality is that Venezuela is rarely discussed in the pages of the NYT, even though it is, in fact, on our doorstep.
1
There is a misconception of left and right, we tend to see only the extremes of both sides, and each groups automatically excuses the excesses committed by those they support. Venezuela is a perfect example, it is not a populist country it is a tyranny supported by an army, denounced by its victims, since the times of Hugo Chaves, and ignored by anyone who could put real pressure on the Government. A South American country wealthy in natural resources in which people lack the esencial
1
I'm old enough to remember when the CIA colluded with Chilean elites to overthrow the democratically elected Salvador Allende in 1973. At the time, one major U.S. talking point was that no nation had ever elected a Communist in a free election. Then the Chileans did it, and they had to be "taught a lesson."
When I heard about the economic problems in Venezuela, which the right wing was blaming on "socialism" and in a country where the vast majority of the economy was in private hands, I thought, "I've seen this movie before. It's a capital strike of the kind that the CIA encouraged in Chile."
I have seen nothing to dissuade me from that view. Early on, there were news reports of government troops breaking into company warehouses that were full of supposedly "unavailable" goods.
A Facebook poster who purported from Chile (one never really knows on Facebook) complained that "only the rich" could afford to buy decent food, so I asked him what the rich were doing to make sure that everyone else had food. Silence.
Unfortunately, Maduro is out of his depth here and doesn't command the personal loyalty that allowed Chavez to survive the 2002 coup attempt, in which the "democratic" opposition started by abolishing the national legislature and firing all the court judges.
6
Why is Venezuela always singled out? We've been actively trying to undermine their government for years but we support governments like Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador. Where is the outrage for those governments?
5
Right. Or Mexico, a country run by the drug cartels where journalists who dare denounce the corruption going on get killed with impunity and the police murders groups of students whose bodies are not found. where women are constantly murdered. Mexico is not a problem for many Usamericans, liberal or conservative. As long as capital is not threatened Mexico is not a problem. Just build a wall.
You're right. I'm more worried about Trump than Maduro. If you're not, well, you should follow the news more closely.
5
Nice try. Perhaps Mr. Stephens has failed to register that we're in a "Code Red" situation here at home.
Patriots are paying attention to saving the United States. Mr. Stephens is looking for false issues to flog his ideological opponents. Good use of a life?
There are a million pressing priorities worthy of attention, once we secure our homeland against Trump and his sickening minions.
6
Why are conservatives not calling for food shipments to Venezuela? Why is Mr. Stephens not writing about hunger and poverty in the USA? Why is the liberal media, ha, not reporting on how residents of the South Bronx are getting along without the heating oil sent to them by Chavez for years!?
2
I agree that it is the responsibility of college students to do something about Venezuela, and not the government that is controlled by the republican party. No doubt a few campus demonstrations will bring down Maduro. If only they would quit drinking beer and video games they could bring true world peace. Moreover if you think Glenn Grunwald is a liberal you need to see a mental health professional.
1
Or, conversely, where are the conservatives ? You know, the deep pocketed Koch Bros. Inc., crowd which just announced raising $400 million for this fall's campaign cycle:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/27/politics/koch-republican-election-candida...
in an off-year when the White House isn't in play ?
Guess it depends on where you sit as to what prism you view things through, huh ?
4
Where are liberals? Trying to forget how warmly they welcomed Hugo Chávez back in 1999, and his nationalization campaign and confiscations of private property, as well as the brutal shows of populist force between then and his 2013 death to maintain his power in the teeth of an economy that went steadily south, even when oil was riding high.
It’s been a little … embarrassing to those who still (astonishingly) argue that extreme socialist views buoyed by a populism that assumes the “rightness” of utterly flattening a society … actually works, and far more usually DOESN’T devolve into a fascistic imposition of will at the point of a knife; and, of course, the disappearance of bathroom tissue (and everything else) from neighborhood bodegas.
This is about par for the course. So, Venezuela under Chávez and now Maduro was and is an abysmal and tragic failure, but let’s not obsess over THAT – where’s the NEXT society that can prove the manifestly evident success of extreme socialism if ONLY we’d let socialism BE socialism?
3
I am a flaming-red liberal, but in all my discussions with other liberals on political issues over the past 3 years, we have never talked about Venezuela.
Only after reading numerous comments such as yours did I realize that certain people ( Trump voters, perhaps?) believed the majority of liberal Democratic voters were Chavez supporters. Only after reading such comments, did I bother to even read a few articles about the country and its past leader.
We USAians are not renowned for our geography skills as a people. I would bet that most of my liberal acquaintances ( like my Republican family members) could not even locate Venezuela on a map of the world without assistance.
1
The point about liberal standard-bearers (self-appointed and otherwise) going mute, now that Chavez's leadership has been exposed for what it was, is valid. But the end of this column is smarmy and self-righteous. So Mike Pence has sadly shaken his snowy head a few times: that serves as a competent response from this country's right wing to this human rights crisis? While you're at it Mr. Stephens, why not applaud President Trump for his inchoate tweet about military intervention? Hey, at least he sounded concerned, right?
2
An additional question for the left would be, if the original Chavismo is not bad enough to warrant your outrage, why is its carbon copy here, that is the Trump administration, so bad?
1
There are very many governments that are less than desirable that don’t get much play in the United States. I don’t think that the fact that the Venezuelan government is “left wing” has much to do with it.
The worriesome issue is that the Maduro government is providing a blueprint for the Trump administration on how to erode a country’s democratic rights. The US will see the same results as Venezuela if its citizens are reluctant to stand up to the government.
3
Venezuela is the flip side of the populist authoritarian coin. As a super liberal guy, I can say I've used it as an example of what happens when you destroy your countries institutions and pander to the lowest common denominator. You can probably guess why that's important to point out.
4
"Liberalism" in the US today is a euphemism for "meritocracy." There is no sincere effort to deal with issues of inequality of income and wealth that are at the root of those concerning access to education and health care.
The problems facing the US today have not arisen with the T-Rump election victory, but have been the result of the right turn - by "liberals" - since the New Deal and Great Society legislation. Face it "liberals" it was largely the relatively disadvantaged who tended to vote for T-Rump. Better to whine about the plight of LGBTQs, etc., than the millions of Americans who have lost jobs, incomes, occupations, and communities due to the advance of the economy from which "liberals" have benefited, absolutely and relatively.
1
More to the point, where are conservatives on Trump? That's a far more important question, and aside from a handful of brave souls like Stephens, they're nowhere to be found.
1
Some of us only have so much energy to spend on politics while working and taking care of our families. Since we're facing a self inflicted national emergency and are under foreign attack here at home, thank to longstanding efforts of the conservative movement in this country (Nixon -> Palin -> Trump) spare me the preaching.
1
Why is it the responsibility of campus liberals to protest every wrong you see, Mr. Stephens? Maybe the campus conservatives could organize something on their own.
They are capable. They invite Milo Yiannopoulos as a thumb in the eye of moderates and liberals. They organize attempts to get liberal professors disciplined.
To be fair to both groups, hey mostly attack the wrongs they identify when think they can do something about them.
2
We put a little money together last year to buy some toiletries, soap, toothpaste, etc., and other items for Venezuelans to receive during the Christmas Season. Most of the money expensed was for transporting the items into Venezuela. The toiletries had to be broken into small packages to pass through Venezuelan Customs. We were told larger packages were broken into and the goods didn't make it to addressed recipients. It took awhile before the packages made it. The toiletries sent in early December were received at the end of January beginning of February. We were told the Venezuelans who received them were very gratified to receive them. These toiletries were toothpaste, soap, razor blades, tampons, etc. The moral outrage is loud when it is antibiotics and medicines for the dying and the young. The frustation at the ineptitude of the Maduro regime is more about daily life. This shouldn't continue there has to be a third way. Our hearts go out to the people of Venezuela.
3
Venezuela reminds me of the other CIA infested disorderly overthrows of elected legitimate "left" governments. The CIA threads run through Iran (Mosadegh replaced by the shah), Guatemala (Arbenz replaced by the dictator Aramas), Chile (Allende assassinated & replaced by the dictator Pinochet), running through El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama (for once the dictator was deposed instead of being imposed), through the recent Honduras killings and replacements, and the 15 year campaign against Hugo Chavez, only ending with his unusual death.
What binds all these events together? Large corporate and US interests threatened by leaders not following US instructions.
In my view the Venezuela issue is all about its oil. It is my view the US has done its best to destabilize the country.
To answer your question, US history in the world since 1945 may explain why campus activity is limited to the Venezuelan right/wealthy/oligarchs as our out of control government stirs the fires of war.
Venezuela is likely another Viet Nam and unwinnable war if you ask me.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
3
Venezuela is one crisis that the US did not cause other than Clinton pressuring Chavez's coup in 1992.
Since Venezuela has a leftist government, the "conservatives" should be more active.
Mr Stephens has liberal ideas against Mr Trump and non compassionate conservatives, but has no positive solutions.
Where are the 3 million Venezuelan refugees? We should be helping them.
1
Years before Chavez, I was having a morning coffee at a side-walk cafe in in Venezuela. A tall old man about 80 wearing an old Stetson approached me and sat down to visit. He had had rum for breakfast, apparently, and was thrilled to hear I was from Texas. He liked cowboys. He said when he was younger, he had killed the sheriff in his town and a couple of his deputies. Why? "Because they liked to take car wheels and grind the edges razor sharp and hang my friends from trees and make them dance barefoot on them."
About ten miles from my abode, ten or fifteen young soldiers pulled up to a crossroads and were murdered by two leftist guerillas with AK 47's. Not long after that, I was driving late at night on a lonely road when I was stopped at a road-block by 10 or 15 young soldiers. They already had an old car stopped. The doors were open and the light was on. An older officer in the back seat was pistol-whipping a woman across the face. Whack, whack, whack. They told me to leave and I did. So, Maduro is a corrupt dictator. Republicans don't care. They want the minerals. The Trump administration will not be an honest broker to resolve problems.
Before Trump, Pence, Ryan and McConnell finance a war, maybe they should recruit and lead a few volunteer divisions. Try Republican fraternities first! No? I didn't think so. There are no Theodore Roosevelt's in that crowd.
4
Where is Brett Stephens condemnation of the many Campus Republican groups for their lack of protest against what Stephens sees as left-wing evil in Venezuela? Could it be because their only purpose, and the reason they are well-funded by the right, is because they exist only to attack all things left in the US? If the best he can come up with by way of protest from the right is Pence, known for fake moral outrage that serves his purpose-of-the-day, then how morally bankrupt does that make his Republican party?
4
As long as the GOP is in charge of Congress and the White House, Brett Stephens is asking the wrong question. Surprised? Of course not.
2
Great article, thank you! It is true that my left-wing friends defended Chavez to no end, and now are muted in embarrassment. The distinction has to be made to them and to everyone, that the Chavez regime is not about left-wing politics. The socialist pose was only a ruse to dupe the world, so his clan would engage in widespread robbery and criminality. The left-wing should rise in anger for having been duped, and engage in worldwide protests about how a criminal mafia gets hold of a whole country and its population with the world standing by. We are just sitting pretty while a country is gutted from within, and a cancer of criminals trading drugs, minerals, passports and oil illegally is beginning to spread to the rest of the continent.
2
Yeah, we could perhaps have more 'awareness' from liberals on Venezuela, but to what end? From everything I've read and heard, The US preaching on Venezuela has little effect, and the US taking major action against the country is likely to have more negative effect than positive (other than perhaps action against individuals, which as I gather has already been taken).
And lord knows there are plenty of big problems closer to home that both need attention and just maybe we can (at least eventually) have some effect on. So I'll tell you what Bret, when you speak out on say Gerrymandering or Gun Control, I'll speak out about Venezuela. How about it?
1
If Maduro falls, who is to say his replacement will be better? Venezuela is an oil-rich country, and I am sure there are plenty of plutocrats interested in taking over.
2
Life as usual is complicated but don't lambaste countries like Cuba and Venezuela which have been or are under the thumb of American "high rollers" unless you've been there yourself. I have - twice to Cuba and once to VZ.
1
Most activists are busy trying to save American democracy from Trump and Putin. Venezuela may have to wait a bit. Tyrannical authoritarianism is now on our own doorstep, propped up by Russian intruders. We're kind of engaged in that struggle, Bret. Maduro will just have to take a number.
2
Thank you Mr. Stephen for pointing what would be obvious to any Venezuelan expatriate living in the USA. I like many others had to leave Venezuela and now thankfully work in academia in the USA. I just can't tell how many times I had to argue with my liberal colleagues about the disaster looming in my country when Chavez was at his peak of popularity. They didn't see or mind that he was taking control of all political institutions, that the economic model was unsustainable that he was becoming an authoritarian, that elections were getting manipulated, that corruption was rampant and that the country was going to the inevitable place that it is now. They just liked the story of this utopian place with a robin hood type strong leader bringing 21st century socialism and making funny remarks about the then USA president GW.
2
i hate to say this, but what's happening down there is pretty much their business. I think we certainly can help individuals. I think the criticism of Maduro/Chavez has always been there. But this is not a threat to the US, and I find it hard to understand why we should engage in direct intervention.
3
Goodness. Stephens isn't asking for direct U.S. intervention. He's correctly asking why college campuses show no interest in the Venezuelan tragedy, masterminded by its tyrant whose army keeps him going. Nor do campuses care about the fate of millions of Kurds, innocent Syrians being gassed, etc. Can/should our govt. get involved in every fiasco across the world? How could it? But, the academic left shows little to no interest. Traditionally, Republicans haven't shown much humanitarian concern. Both sides are wrong. Yet, the campus left, including some professors, remains actively vocal against Israel. It's not mere criticism of Israel coupled with intelligent alternatives of how Israel can handle the Palestinian issue. It has become total opposition to a Jewish state, while ignoring the raging anti-Semitism and brutal terrorism of the Palestinian street, or how this effects Jews in Israel and abroad. Sorry, but if this is the # 1 international problem that bothers college students who fancy themselves as liberal, there is a moral dilemma many don't wish to see.
26
Since Trump won't impose sanctions on Russia mandated by Congress, he's unlikely to do anything about Venezuela. The US doesn't need Venezuelan oil and a big part of US foreign policy has been driven by oil for nearly a century.
What I don't understand is this constant failure by conservatives to understand cases like Venezuela. Mr. Stephens writes that this is a dictatorship, then refers to it as a "socialist paradise" and a "left-wing villain".
Why is it so difficult to comprehend that a dictatorship is fascist? That's right-wing, not left, and fascist, not socialist. Sure, the dictators always claim some form of socialism, but they're lying like Trump. There have not been any Communist or Socialist governments in the modern world.
So this article is pretty well written, but reeks of Republican propaganda, and accuses "the left" of misdeeds for no reason. I guess Trump has made it OK to lie all the time and demonize Americans as the enemy.
In any case, there aren't protests about Venezuela because, like North Korea, there isn't anything a protest can accomplish, and there's nothing we can really do about it. These are just horrible, fascist, conservative countries, and invading would only make matters much worse. Better to focus on causes where progress can be made.
2
A key difference between the examples Mr. Stephens cites and Venezuela is that the US government has been in opposition to the regime in Venezuela for almost two decades, and has numerous sanctions in place.
In contrast, those activists oppose(d) a US government that support(ed) apartheid South Africa in the '80s and Israeli occupation today. Activists want(ed) a concrete change in US policy towards those nations.
There's no doubt Venezuela is in crisis, but with US opposition already in place, what would be the end game for protests? US intervention? That might appeal to neocons like Mr. Stephens, but most people have enough sense otherwise.
1
On The United States of Trump, Where Are Republicans? As one of Bret's apparently despised, hypocritical "liberals", yes, I'm upset about the endless horrors we're treated to daily around the world. Obviously, we can't ignore what's happening overseas but we have a domestic disaster on our hands that must take center stage. As others have observed here, we really do need to clean up our own mess -i.e., restore some moral authority, stability and integrity- before diving into those of others. So, Bret, why don't you get your list of those scorned in better order and direct some shots at those supporting our very own nightmare regime? Then we can talk about the other places.
1
It's no mystery why the Left wants Americans to know as little about the horrors that are occurring in Venezuela. Led by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, the Left - with the Democrat Party and the mainstream media in tow - are committed to changing America to a socialist society, replete with contempt for free enterprise businesses, class warfare and income redistribution.
So it makes perfect sense that they would be desperate to keep the American people from seeing the results that such economic and political philosophies lead to.
Sanders and Warren can in no way be compared to Chavez, Maduro, Cuba. Fascism is what exists in Venezuela. Cuban style communism that has morphed into a bizarre tail-eating snake. To suggest such an analogy is truly misinformed. Study up.
I was about to write a similar response to the one written below by Mark Carolla. Mr Trump takes up all the oxygen in the room. Each day brings reports of such reprehensible behavior that one cannot ignore the news coverage. It unfortunately is like a bad soap opera but one that the viewer can't help but tune into (perhaps this is what the egomania of our president is hoping for). By the time we have read and listened to the details of the president's latest outrageous behavior, and perhaps tuned into the news of another area of the world of particular relevance for each of us there is no time or appetite for more tragedy. Sadly, Venezuela can't compete with school shootings at home, Syria, North Korea, Afghanistan, and all the other disasters that occupy a more central role in our news reporting.
2
Mr. Stephens, Please think about this statement a moment: "When you’ve ceded the moral high ground to the Trump administration, you’ve ceded a piece of your soul." You're outraged (well, you aren't, but you want to assume the posture of outrage in order to mock liberals) about the left's failure to protest Venezuela's human rights failure. And to show the depths of liberal hypocrisy, you taunt liberals for ceding the moral high ground to ... wait for it ... the Republican administration of the Republican President of the United States. So I might ask you, Mr. Stephens, if the administration is such a moral wasteland that its expression of protest about another country is suspect, where are the conservatives? Why are conservatives not only not outraged about Trump/Pence, et al, but why does the conservative/evangelical movement and the Republican Congressional delegation support and actively promote this administration? The President openly mocks the evidence of Russian interference in our elections and deliberately scorns Congressional sanctions on Russia for that interference, and the conservative response is ... cricket chirping. Remove the plank from your own eye, Mr. Stephens, about the behavior of conservatives in your backyard before lecturing liberals about our silence on events far from our shores. We're kinda busy protesting your party's would-be tyrant.
This column by Stephens is disingenuous, tendentious bilge.
Why is this a liberal issue, and not conservative ? Your thesis is "American liberals support policies of social democracies, therefore they are quiet on a dictator who comes from a socialist background? " That's a false equivalence and awful.
Well Bret, in case you have not noticed, countries like Colombia and Brazil have gotten little traction over their catastrophic neighbor.
Also, don't you think if Trump could create a diversion with a military invasion of Venezuela he would have done it? There's a salient lack of resources in this country stemming from the Iraq War and it's many terrible aftermaths. And that was the product of policies from conservatives, not liberals.
The U.S. politicians and populace are terribly ignorant about South America.
When there was a coup attempt to oust Chavez, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice supported it in order to uphold "democratic principles." However, Chavez came through a fair-and-square democratic election. The people shooting at him were committing a crime. Chavez was an abomination. But his predecessors had no truck with the poor.
Why are not people outraged at China building railroads and canals all over Central and South America? Those will inflict far greater damage to the U.S. and environment, and are a subtle violation of the Monroe Doctrine.
1
Mr. Stephens has again hit the fashionable left where it hurts.
The answer to this article’s question is simple. The left has long sold its soul to its ideology. They’re not the only ones to have done that - witness the Republicans selling their soul to Trump’s demagogic populism. But nobody makes so much nose about helping the downtrodden and making the world a better place.
And just read the majority of the comments and see them going back to Cuba’s Batista and whatever the US did in Latin America sixty years ago. That might work for the feel-good American leftists, but not for the starving Venezuelans.
3
Dear Mr. Stephens,
American Liberals have their hands quite full at the moment, as our government is currently being occupied by enemies of everything Liberals (and decent Americans) stand for, courtesy in part to the seemingly-respectable shilling coming from places like your column.
1
The problem is the US - oligarchic hegemony which often controls countries like Venezuela have created such resentment (ie. US military installing friends, Monsanto apologists, etc) the left can't see wading into something which will ultimately open up to the typical capitalist vultures swooping in to take control & oppress, and they know the US firepower will do tons to "free" the nation for their profit-making ends, anyway. I agree, however, the left leadership should speak loudly, vociferously, against Maduro, which would help a lot. Cowards all! (Incidentally, please note, the Cisneros clan seems to operate comfortably no matter the regime in Venezuela.)
I see no outrage on the Right. I don't see Venezuela and its horrors rolling from the lips of our President or our Secretary of State. I don't see Congressional Republicans demanding action on Venezuela. I don't see College Republican organizations leading the charge on this issue.
Thanks for another straw man column, Bret.
1
The oligarchy, with the connivance of the US, has indeed brought down Venezuela. The reforms instituted during the Chavez regime were a great help to the masses, but could not survive the onslaught.
2
First of all, we 'Liberals' (and other common-sense citizens) just don't want to be blamed for their problems and their downfall, which we will be if we get politically involved.
Secondly, Maduro and Chavez were elected with very clear majorities. Venezualans have largely brought this on themselves. Why is it up to us to tell them how to vote and to live?
Thirdly, to what end are you suggesting that we protest? To give Trump an excuse to invade Venezuala? Most of us 'Liberals' would rather not go there.
Maduro is nobody's darling, neither the left nor the right. He's not even a proper socialist, rather he's a simple-minded tyrant, which gives him more in common with Donald Trump than with anyone else in the USA. Venezuela is not an example of failed socialism, it's an example of failed tyranny. The government assumed too much power and ignored the will of the people. This is exactly what we have to fear from Trumpism. There are plenty of examples of successful socialist democracies (the happiest people in the world according to surveys), so don't blame socialism.
1
Fixing Venezuela has not become a major idea in U.S. politics because any rational plan to do anything meaningful would require both parties to do something they hate. It would require the Democrats to support a large scale military operation with all the blood, treasure, and inevitable civilian deaths. We have proven, painfully and expensively, in the last couple of decades that taking over another country is rather hard to do well. Then the Republicans would have to support a nation building program on an almost unimaginable scale. There is no point, morally or otherwise, in taking down the current government if all you get is Syria on the Caribbean. Since both parties have excellent political, if not moral, reasons for ignoring it, it gets ignored.
As a liberal,I am absolutely appalled a what is going on in Venezuela. But it's hard to pay close attention when the President of the United States spends every day creating rhetorical mayhem against everyone who fails to see him as the Great Leader and future King.
2
"Pundits" have a habit or failing to admit their mistakes. (Cf. Paul Krugman on right-wing economists, who are the worst of the breed.) That's the obvious explanation for the fact that there have been few mea culpas from the left about the absurd Bolivarian Revolution. (And of course Mr. Stephens has to drag in the Palestinians.) But that Venezuela gets any attention at all is at least as remarkable as the phenomenon he discerns of relative silence about the enormities occurring there. "Where's the outrage" could easily refer to 15 or 20 countries in Africa, half a dozen in Asia, and two or three others in South America. More interesting is how one or another case takes hold in the USA, especially on campuses and in the media. The Israeli case is easy to understand, since it gets such play in the US media, but when "Western liberals [try to] do something" about the plight of the Palestinians their own government tries to make their protests illegal. When will Stephens (and - laughing out loud - Pence) start asking "Where are the conservatives?" in reference to, say, Guinea or Gabon or, even better, Uganda or Rwanda?
1
Your column shows why the Democrats are an inadequate alternative to the party of the Southern Strategy. They’ve made a home for the sort of behavior pattern you’re criticizing on the left.
That behavior pattern is as tribal in its emotional and intellectual reflexes as its counterpart on the right. And it’s as post-modern, if that’s the right term, about creating perceived reality and defining truth by means of repetition and force of will, with insufficient ties to reason and empiricism, as the infamous remarks about the reality-based community attributed to Karl Rove.
This is not a false equivalence. A person who claims it is a false equivalence should explain why. Otherwise, there’s no reason to think that uttering the phrase “false equivalence” is not a self-calming device that depends on repetition and force of will to establish its own truth.
The great thing about the deep logic of part of MLK’s “I Have A Dream” speech is that it took a general principle that we say underlies American democracy, all are created equal with equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and urged us to address right now a screamingly obvious way that that principle had long been violated with tremendous harm and injustice.
If neither the Democrats nor the Republicans can wrench themselves back to that way of thinking and feeling then in my view we need a viable third party to reconnect with that sort of practical reason.
15
It is a false equivalence because liberals have their hands full. There is only so much oxygen to fight injustice. I am personally appalled by Venezuela and so are all of my friends, but is Venezeula worse than South Sudan, Burma, Afghanistan, Philippines, Hungary etc? The world is in terrible shape right now. We do what we can.
Conservatives, by contrast, only stand up for those causes ideologically convenient for them. If Pence seemed to care in the slightest about anything happening in Africa, and not just tilting against what he perceives as leftist (and it should be pointed out that liberals do not champion any of Venezuela's policies -- maybe four decades ago, but we learn from our mistakes), then maybe he'd get more credit.
Wow. Just wow. Naomi Klein, Sean Penn, and Danny Glover - yes, the triumvirate of powerful policy-setting liberals. Right. Stephens takes aim at a Canadian activist, two Hollywood actors (not exactly the intellectual bastion of the party) and college undergrads, and holds them up as examples of the thought leaders of all liberals. Talk about cheap shots.
"Where is the liberal outrage on college campuses?" Uh, where is the conservative outrage? Conservatives care even less, but that's okay! Conservatives aren't supposed to care - liberals are. Liberals are suffering from moral dereliction, but the fact that no conservatives care either is fine. Just fine.
Conservatives do care! "Only Mike Pence has stepped up!" Mike Pence is Vice President. Reacting to humanitarian disasters around the world is HIS JOB, which he performs poorly.
As for a few Hollywood actors praising a socialist dictatorship in Venezuela, we now have a President, unchecked by his party, praising right-wing strongmen around the world. Can you see which one is worse?
84
It was not just Hollywood actors who praised Chavez. As a former supporter of Democracy Now, I had to stop because of the rigid blindness that led to support of Chavez and then Maduro. Then their was Joe Kennedy who took free oil from Venezuela at the expense of their impoverished citzenry. And the left wing praise of the health care system which has been completely dismantled.
3
This is some epically weak trolling. The Republicans control the federal government. They have already proved multiple times over that they don't care a whit about other viewpoints than their own. As far as I can tell nobody is stopping them from doing whatever in response to the Maduro regime's awfulness.
What I don't see here is any suggestion of the form any such policy would take. You're so smart and informed, surely you have a simple solution. Maybe if Trump just asks nicely (or spews a couple of name-calling tweets about him in between today's laundry list of lies), Maduro will see the error of his ways and either reform Venezuela, or magnanimously step aside for another to do so. I'm not exactly holding my breath.
I'm not even a leftie, at least by historical standards, but the Republicans have disowned my old Rockefeller wing so thoroughly that I don't know where else to go.
Please try a bit harder next time, Mr. Stephens.
49
I think this piece, in warning us of the danger of voicelessness, is exactly how Trump got elected. What exactly is the leftist position? Also, the terms liberal and leftist have been conflated. What does liberal even mean? What I see is silence everywhere. An admission from the ultra-left that Chavez was insane and Maduro more so, would be helpful. Left leaners are afraid to critique lest they lose their wishy washy status with the ultraleft.
3
Agree that dictatorships or other repressive actions by govts around the world don't get enough serious action from good-hearted people. For example, why does the US allow any Chinese imports until China allows freedom of religion and free elections? Where's our own moral bottom line for what sort of repression we'll tolerate? (See Evan Osnos' book The Age of Ambition) Consumers have huge power; the people of the US and other secular democracies could have influenced China, Venezuela, etc long ago just through consumer boycotts, inc the govt as a consumer. Regarding right or left repressive governments - I've long wondered why, if they really think they have the better idea for governance, must they impose an authoritarian rule on their people instead of allowing free elections? In 2001 while in Cuba, I learned about their perceived need to re-educate people for a generation or two post-1959 about the merits of caring about the "we" (the state) rather than the "me" (individual advancement). For me, that didn't justify political repression. But I hated the US attempts at regime change in Cuba when we weren't boycotting goods/services from other equally repressive regimes - we are arbitrary about this similar to Trump arbitrarily exempting Florida from off-shore drilling. I agree with Stephens - let's get serious about exerting all possible pressure on immoral regimes around the world, as consumers and as US government, regardless of left- or right-orientation.
If I had any faith in the reporting on either side or from some "middle", I would take it far more seriously. But, the history of Chile, Nicaragua, Cuba, El Salvador, Argentina, Brazil, and on and on, convince me that Alex is correct. The oligarchic social structure of these countries contributes to the permanent divisiveness and struggle in South and Central American countries.
And guess what structure Republicans and Trump have set this country on course for? The same 1% / 99% inequity that most of the Americas is heir to.
Venezuela, let's follow the money, follow the oil wealth, follow the indices of social equality and wealth accumulation. What have American companies done to foster social equality.
If I had any faith on the reporting or the balanced analysis from Venezuela, rather than the right wing expatriate elite's narrative similar to Cuba's exiles, I may weigh in with outrage... but towards who?
"A larger reason is that, until a few years ago, the Venezuelan regime was a cause of the left"
Yes, and that was because of extreme right wing abuses, an incredible economic inequality in which most had nothing, no medical care or future, and both quality and length of life were stunted. The country's oil wealth was taken by a tiny elite, and nothing left for anyone else, nothing done for anyone else.
Are we to return to that. The wealthy Batista-like emigres hiding in the US and urging the US to return them to power would return to an awful situation. That must be considered too, not just bashing the efforts to change those abuses.
8
Sorry Venezuela before Chavismo was not Batista-Cuba and even if it was the promises of what Chavez was going to do and fix when he got elected were very far from what he did. Chavismo destroyed what with all its defects was a prosperous democracy. Why it is so hard for some to recognize that what they thought once was great (Castro, Chavez, Mugabe etc etc) at the end didn't turn out to be that good.
2
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/02/09/world/whatever-happened-to-venezuela-s... "At a time when the rest of South America is paring down public spending and opening up markets in the quest for foreign investment, Venezuela stands as a peculiarly enduring throwback to an age of excessive government economic intervention, and a reminder of its perils." That was 1996. Take a look at The Journal's story about the Class of 1994.
The horrors of socialism -- taken, ahem, collectively -- exceed those of Nazism. Leftists are allowed to get away with: "Well, that wasn't really socialism. They should've done it like this ... [here they helpfully explain the proper way to organize society]." That there has never appeared a democratic socialist society, that experiments in socialism either end quickly as in Sweden, or rapidly descend into tyranny, is due to the principles of socialism, not the contingencies of its historical application. Leftists only care that its INTENT is noble.
Name ONE case of socialist revolution about which you COULDN'T say that it was undertaken because of preexisting ills. That does not therefore excuse the fact that this ideology, which leads to even greater suffering, is supported by irresponsible academics. In the 1950s, Venezuela was fourth in the world in per capita GDP. From the 1920s to the 1970s -- politically repressive years -- it was mostly property rights, a free economy, and immigration that allowed it to achieve this, not just oil.
"And then there’s the perennial — and perennially unworthy — cause of “freeing” Palestine, for which there never is a shortage of credulous campus zealots." --Really?
2
Hard FACTS.
1) Syria is 6,700 miles away from the US mainland. Venezuela is just 2,800 miles away from the US, located within the same hemisphere (Americas).
2) 13 million Syrians need humanitarian aid, based on UN figures; 19 million Venezuelans are in need of humanitarian aid, based on UN figures.
3) U.S.-pledged assistance to $5.9 billion since Syria's civil war began. U.S. has not officially pledge a set amount for humanitarian assistance to Venezuela yet.
4) 5.1 million people have fled Syria's civil war as refugees. 3.0 million people have fled Venezuela since the Chavez-Maduro era.
5) Syrian civil war began in 2011 and has claimed the lives of roughly 400,000 Syrians, according to the United Nations. Venezuelan violent deaths has claim over 400,000 lives during the Chavez-Maduro regime, as per UN-PROVEA and Observatory of Venezuelan Violence-NGO-figures.
Venezuelan is dying and disappearing right before our watch. Displacement, Hunger, Systematic Annihilation and Genocide are executing this neighbor country of the U.S. A rogue-thug state (Chavez-Maduro) is the culprit for this human calamity. Finally someone at the helm of the U.S is doing something about it. The Trump administration and the GOP leaders are frontly embarked in putting an end to this tragedy....while he Liberals in Washington (and their regional friends) are simply contemplating all the events from their TVs.
6
And then there’s the perennial — and perennially unworthy — cause of “freeing” Palestine, for which there never is a shortage of credulous campus zealots.
All this concern about the people in Venezuela to show just where your own heart turns to stone.
2
I'm too saturated with America's nutcase to expend any time tracking Venezuela's nutcase.
I see events in Venezuela as blowback due to decades of American interference in places where it does not belong, much like what America did to Iran in 1953 (topple a democratically elected leader thus triggering decades of rule by self aggrandizing nutcases till this very day).
2
I am totally opposed to country wide violence of any kind. Everyone knows that. And it almost wouldn't even have to be said. So, now you hear it. But you all know it.
1
'and perennially unworthy — cause of “freeing” Palestine' - Yikes, Mr. Stephens starts out with a crude dismissal of 4.5 million victims of an apartheid state.
He must be reminiscing of the 80s if he wants the left's help in expanding American imperialism to South America. Capitalism, like any cancer, will apparently not be satisfied until it has total hegemonic control of the world. Democratically elected leaders will be smeared until a small cabal of wealthy elites is allowed to trade and plunder all of the world's resources. No, Mr. Stephens - the left will continue to resist capitalism and the Thanatos it promotes.
2
Sir you really should look up the word imperialist.
If you have a point it’s that the Venezuela Oligarchy
backed by American Corporatism led to the Bolivarian revolution
6
We're right here. We have a priorities list. Our first priority is lancing the suppurating boil on the Republic that festers at 1600. Our second priority is the electoral defeat of the creased-suit Ayn Rand devotees running the modern GOP. Our third priority is the political side-lining of the third of the country addicted to bigot porn and fully invested in gun worship and in anti-science superstition. Then we'll turn our attention to Venezuela.
2
It's despicable, but hardly anything new... the left did it with the stalinist Soviet Union, and there never was much regret. If they could do it with the most murderous regime in history, and are fine with that, they can easily do it with any other small-time villain like Maduro.
4
Sorry, Bret, but the left is probably too busy trying to save the US from that abomination that your party elected as President. What's the purpose of saving other ships when your own is taking on water?
2
The conservative's favorite tactic: Find something about which you can say, "Where are liberals in X." Liberals, flabbergasted, rightly wonder, "Where are conservatives, period." It reminds of how the right nurses one exaggeration from Obama (''You can keep your own health plan" - true for 95% of policy holders) against the WMD whoppers of second Bush administration, and the pathological serial lying of Trump. Where are conservatives on the fate of the United States and the future of the planet.
4
Amen Mr. Stephens !!!!!
"Still, it says something about the moral dereliction of too many liberals"...... yes it does: it says they are hypocrites, who work on a double standard in foreign policy as well as domestic policy! That is why liberal /progressives have no credibility . They should look in the mirror when searching for someone to blame for that.
2
Venezuela is a case of socialism vs capitalism. This cannot be allowed. Whatever it takes, it must be stamped out. This is the capitalist bottom line.
The pity is that so many times we have brought countries to their knees with brutal regimes, even starvation. When will we wake up and ask "is our bloody fight for this financial system really worth it?" Will socialism always be anathema?
I'm glad you can't whip up the campuses to foght against Maduro. He's taking a stand for the people.
4
Smack in between Venezuela and Florida is Puerto Rico. Sorry if I'm focusing on a crisis that's closer to home geographically and politically, a humanitarian crisis exacerbated by incompetence, cronyism, and - I have little trouble suspecting -
the racism of the Republican party and the President.
1
What garbage article, like usual a lot of talking points without providing real numbers to back it up. The guy calls the cause of stopping illegal settlements an unworthy cause... and then compare trump's Charleston debacle where a nazi terrorist killed and injured people, with protests in Venezuela where there was generalized violence including a right-wing protest where they set a man on fire. Funny that the same guy that enlist so many human right abuses forgets to list the guat. base, the US Interventonism, the US blockade including against cuba and Venezuela. Maybe you should remember what the CIA + koch brothers did to Brazil in 64 where they successfully destroyed the democratically elected government, a lot of this left wing authoritarianism that everyone should be completely against is a direct result of the pressure that US government interventions put on those places.
6
I don't understand -- you think US foreign policy is or should be determined by what some dopey campus liberals think and do? Why aren't you raising the roof about the state department? Oh, yes, that's because your buddies in the GOP could care less about using US diplomacy because they think it's a net cost not a benefit. So sure, there's a naive absence of condemnation of Maduro or maybe there's just a limit to how much any group can take on as a cause. In any event, good on you Brett for identifying an issue on which your straw men liberal campus activists should be criticized. What's your excuse?
1
What's happening in Venezuela is a problem, but using it to leverage a partisan attack that questions the legitimacy of liberals demonstrates that Stephens could care less about Venezuela. The column deflects attention from the strongman rising in our country. He's stooped to the level of "whatboutisms" and offers no insights into the crisis there. Typical right-wing garbage.
3
On Parkland, Las Vegas, Orlando, Newtown, Virginia Tech, Columbine, etc., etc., etc., where are conservatives?
2
I'm not a constituent of the Venezuelan government. My government is not a supporter of the Venezuelan regime, my government doesn't care what I think anyway. If I want to protest something, my own government provides plenty.
Not my circus, not my monkeys.
2
See any protests about prisoners being executed in Iran? The years people in Zimbabwe lived under that miserable Mugabe? The horrific deaths by chemical bombs in Syria?
Mr. Stephens, you know that the only real protests staged on a regular basis are against Israel. To an unknowing Martian who mistakenly lands during a college protest, he/she will assume that Israel is the most horrific, brutal country in the world, threatening the entire world order with its nuclear arsenal, that it machine guns people on a daily basis after starving and brutalizing them first. Is it because the Palestinian and pro-Palestinian community is so effective? Partially, but the real story is pathetically simple. It's redirected anti-Semitism, and its purveyors feel so g-o-o-d about it. Why bother with the likes of Venezuelans, who have nothing to do with the Jewish state.
2
A better question: Where are conservatives (other than Stephens) on Venezuela? Seems to me both liberals and conservatives have more then enough deploring to do about the unqualified, un-normal dude badly impersonating our own "president."
1
When you are Jewish yourself, it doesn't help your case to deride the Palestinian cause as "perennially unworthy." I will draw your attention to the speech Arafat made at the UN in 1974. You were what, maybe one year old at the time? Try reading it and tell me Palestinians are "unworthy."
When you write that way, it undermines your entire argument, whatever it may be, in the rest of your column. But, you never seem to get that.
Go Blue--for only taking four years. We've been busy trying to resettle refugees from Middle East countries ravaged by Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of your gang.
2
Where Are Liberals?
President Nicolás Maduro and his liberal government employees transferred all of their nations petro-dollars to their numbered Swiss Bank Accounts, and let the citizens go without the necessities of life!
3
For that matter, I haven't heard much on Venezuela from American conservatives, either.
2
What a sanctimonious article. What purpose does the writing of this piece serve other than self-congratulatory Liberal-bashing with zero self-awareness?
Speaking as a someone who slides further left every time I read another piece of morally relativistic whataboutism, yes, Liberals are aware of the crisis in Venezuela, and no, we're not vacillating about it because we're all secretly aspiring members of the Communist Party.
It is catastrophic, it is Maduro's fault, and should be tried at the Hague. However, Venezuela is covered less in the media, and there is crisis fatigue from Syria and Burma, both of which are actually significantly worse in human terms. To suggest that my commitment to human rights is a sham because Jeremy Corbyn and some B-List Democrats have indefensible sympathies for erstwhile socialist states is absurd.
Mr. Stephens attempts to discredit liberal commitment to human rights not because it is a heartfelt conservative concern, but because doing so gives cover to a right-wing worldview wherein it is OK only to acknowledge the rights of people on your 'team' and no one else's. If liberals can be shown to be insincere about human rights, then suddenly all of the right's outrageous policies are morally equivalent. Thus his flippant dismissal of the colonisation and ethnic cleansing of Palestine, thus the broad support for torture, the elimination of habeas corpus in Guantanamo, and dictatorial regimes like Duterte's, Sisi's, the Saudis', and Putin's.
3
Can't wait to read the plethora of excuses.
1
If we if we can rationalize and even excuse one of the longest occupations of an entire Palestinian people in modern history, there is no virtue or credibility to argue about.
1
We're busy...
2
On Venezuela, where are the Conservatives. See how easy that was.
3
If "broad sanctions" are your primary tools to use against Maduro & Venezuela, then you, Stephens, are more interested in regime change than dealing with the suffering of the people. Your sanctimony rings hollow.
4
And the gold medal for flimsy nonsense goes to ... Bret Stephens! How did Bret earn this amazing win? He found a couple people spouting nonsense, who hold no office and speak for no one themselves, declared they are the voice of liberals, and concluded, Ergo Democrats are stooges. All the while conveniently forgetting there is a stooge who holds an office and speaks for his party, and that is Donald Trump. Except Bret didn't forgot of course. He's just hoping to make us do so.
Perhaps liberals understand that it might be time for the United States to stay out of South America. In case you haven't noticed the US's record in South and Central America leaves something to be desired. As well you've got your own would-be banana republic dictator to worry about.
1
Really, Venezuela only? Why not look into many other countries around the world? Better yet, why don't we look into our own political patio, with Trump leading a nefarious, vicious, unethical, money grabbing and sexually abusive males circus?
If you asked the question, when is the collective, ethical concious going to ride itself from dictators around the world, why not dethrone our own president and his dishonest elite nest? Leading by actions in a good role model.
2
America is now about feeling good. I mentioned Alfred E. Newman's quip on Charles Blow's editorial, "What me worry?"
2
On the Philippines, where are conservatives?
1
"On school shootings, where are conservatives?"
"On the rising deficit, where are conservatives?"
"On basic morality and decency, where are conservatives?"
Here Bret, these are some questions you can ponder if you enjoyed writing this poorly contrived and, frankly, asinine piece.
2
Liberals are expected to support a coup? Since when is a military coup a liberal option?
What is supposed to replace Maduro? We saw in Iraq that removal is only step one, and after that lack of any idea of what to do next becomes a real problem.
The problem is intense here, because as with Honduras, the alternative on hand in Venezuela is a return of right wing oligarchy and extremist abuses. Honduras exploded into a mess of political murder by right wing goons and death squads done to force the right back into power. Is that what we want to do to Venezuela?
5
Where are the "Reagan Boys," now so relevant to "Contras," in Venezuela?
1
Wow, Mr. Stephens. How in the world do you justify this ridiculous piece, asking, hollowly, where the liberals are. I'll tell you where we are. We are reading this dreck and are unsurprised yet angered that again Conservatives such as yourself claim some piece of an intellectual and moral high ground while ignoring the fact that you people are in charge of the three branches of government.
9
Hopefully the liberals are sending boat loads of food. I’m sure Sean Penn could feed quite a few families.
1
When your house is burning down, Stephen, you don't have much interest in the smoke coming from your neighbour's abode.
5
Er, Bret - our current moron president, the result of 40 years conservative thinking and lobbying, is keeping liberals pretty busy right now.
I want to congratulate you. I wondered how, after David Brooks retired, the NYTimes was going to replace his space with equally irrelevant, bungled social and political philosophy. But like your companion Mr. Douthat, you've stepped right into the role.
Please write less.
15
Yes, from now on only write things that Boomer agrees with. Life is hard in the echo chamber as it is. No need for more complications.
1
> Boomer
A smile inducing comment if ever there was one.
Typical conservative babble, blame it on the liberals. Where are the conservative protests Bret? You seem reasonably well informed on the subject why don't you tour college campuses to talk about the Maduro regime? As a conservative aren't you a part of the "moral majority". Get busy and stop asking others to fo your hard work. Right now we liberals are trying to deal with the depraved monster conservatives put in the White House.
7
Much of Europe and the world was coming apart in the 1930's and the U.S did very little. Some may argue that we did have action ie; "lend lease" and oil embargo in Asia. But, the fact remains that only the threat of war will ever matter to those hell bent on tyrannical rule. There will be more Syria like debacles unfold around the globe.
On GUN MURDERS, Where are Republicans?????
Enough " what aboutism" and distraction, SIR. Seriously.
8
Rest assured the liberals in Venezuela are on the CIA bandwagon -- just like here.
2
Where are conservatives on this issue, Bret? I mean, if the demon of socialism is root cause here, why aren't campus Republican groups protesting around the clock?
Most liberals are right here, trying to deal with our own nutjob, who must be better than Maduro in your eyes since he's such an honest, hardworking capitalist hero. He's Hank Rearden come to life!!
3
"liberals"? What is liberal about admiring a fascist dictator like Maduro? (Yes, fascist, resembling Mussolini in ideology, use of street thugs to repress any opposition, cult of the leader, paranoid nationalism, etc.)
They are uncritical worshippers of absolute power. Nothing liberal about that. It is the same as their parents' worship of Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Castro (at least no one is starving in Cuba), or their grandparents' worship of Stalin. Power attracts sycophants.
5
When it comes to the Left's moral compass, as long as any tyrant -- no matter how brutal -- mouths the usual and expected anti-American or anti-Israel bromides, there's nothing to see there; move along; move along.
2
I would hope that the silence represents a learned appreciation of a truth about the Latin American left, i.e., their liberals love socialists who love Marxists who love themselves and the Mercedes that come with power; and they all hate Yanquis. The apologists for Maduro’s thugocracy claim that the hardships of the people are caused by U.S. economic manipulations and the “terrorists and counterrevolutionaries”. That may be the real reason for the relative silence on campus - it’s the leftist rebelious sons and daughters of Latin oligarchs who vigorously defend the regime both here and abroad.
2
Black lives matter & liberalism are one and the same. Liberals only become aroused when there are people of color involved or Muslims. Behind the Liberal movement are people like Ellison a Black Muslim and a outspoken Anti Semite.
Just mention Israel & they come out of the wood work, ready to march & demand divestment of anything concerning Israel.Take israel out of the equation & the passion is gone.This is certainly not the type of Liberal my Father was or I was.It didn’t have to be personal issue. We stood for justice for all the disenfranchised. Today it has become a propaganda forum.
4
Bret Stephens was too liberal for the Wall St. Journal, turns out he's too conservative for the NYT. Of course the liberals loved Chavez while he was redistributing the petro wealth, but now that there is no more wealth for Maduro to pass around, the libs have lost their voice. How unsurprising of them! Reminds me of the Thatcher quote on socialism, "sooner or later you run out of other peoples' money". The liberals are too busy virtue signaling that they haven't noticed the disaster their ideology brings every time it's tried. Makes you wonder just how stupid these rubes are? Turns out they are really dumb.
3
You don't think we have our hands full here? This columnist has a lot of nerve talking about moral dereliction.
1
The author, a Republican sympathizer ,believes he's found reasons to stain what social democracy can provide a nation . This article is propaganda for the right wing narrative that purports to discredit any liberal position. The author conveniently omits the truth behind the crisis in Venezuela; that a good theory of public governance can be upended by the occupant of the 'oval office' ,who then proceeds to line his ,and his sycophants , pockets first .
2
What is the truth behind the crisis then?
The Times knew who it was hiring when they brought Stephens over from the Journal. Eventually, he had to start turning out this combination of trashing college students with a healthy dose of what-about-thatism. I guess he is supposed to get Times' readers juices flowing in the morning. Otherwise, it is just right-wing/republican pap masquerading as serious opinionating.
2
Hey, here's an idea: what if you contacted some of those activists and writers and interviewed them? How about conducting some research on politics and the state of the economy in Venezuela? Shame on the New York Times for allowing space for lazy journalism.
3
It’s an opinion piece. To remind us of what has been forgotten. There is no longer an economy in Venezuela. It’s gone.
This is the best the NYT can do for a "conservative" columnist/viewpoint? Small ball trolling? Pretty weak stuff.
3
Nice try. But no cigar. You can be sure if liberals were taking to the streets on Venezuela conservatives would be mocking them for ignoring America First and not being patriots.
In case you have missed it, America is in a life and death struggle with itself. The first time in history an entire Administrstion is hell bent on destroying our democratic institutions, public education, environment, the economic welfare of its citizens and the international reputation of our country.
The sane patriots of this country (not the current party in power) is a little busy these days.
2
Sorry, Bret, but I do not consider the Palestinian cause "unworthy". Only Israeli apologists such as yourself feel like this. You and others who support Israel's taking of Palestinian land have no shame. Obviously, Maduro is a thug and we should oppose his rule. And I think most of us do. Do you and conservatives like you think that we should invade? Already I think that our government has imposed sanctions on members of his government. Other Latin America governments are in a better situation than we to act in this situation.
4
Conservatives are experts in the “what about the...” argument. When Trump’s porn star affair and the payoff camel out, there is the “what about Bill Clinton” refrain. First, one evil does not explain or excuse another. Next, calling Maduro a liberal is like calling Stalin or Putin liberals and Hitler or Mussolini conservatives. These people are dictators, not liberals or conservatives.
2
No one I know who is liberal is in favor of Chavez or Maduro. They are communist idiots. However, we are self educated enough to know that well-meaning people and efforts can make it worse. LOTS of stories about this worldwide. The author of this article offers no actionable solution. He just wants worthless noise. So he creates more worthless noise.
I know, he had to publish something to get paid. Unfortunately that is what old time newspapers do. Better to let someone publish their thoughts when they have something worth publishing instead of on a schedule. Do you have big insights on a schedule of twice a week? I don't.
1
U.S. liberal= neo-liberal
1
"No one I know who is liberal is in favor of Chavez or Maduro."
Really no one?? Maybe now that Venezuelan is the disaster that it is but when the country was in his path to the disaster that it is now under Chavez many I know were cheering and some still are. By the way I am a Venezuelan expatriate working in academia,and otherwise a liberal.
"Every generation of campus activists embraces a worthy foreign-policy cause:".
"So why the relative silence?"
Being a conservative explains why Bret can't see the actual reason for the "silence". The reason is that we have our own crisis here in the conservative White House and republican Congress. It is exhausting and of such magnitude, including treason, that the amount of energy remaining to go out side our borders is very low. Too bad conservatives don't engage in noble causes for justice and good, liberals could use some help. What do you say conservatives? Want to help people for a change?
5
Why does this have to be a political issue?
Where were conservatives on this issue, except to draw parallels between Chavez and Obama when they were in power?
5
My wife is from Venezuela.
She periodically ships boxes to help her family there, as the situation is tragic.
Having said that, Stephens position is laughable: What about the people of Sudan, Syria, Gaza, our own Puerto Rico, etc. etc.
If I wanted to, I could come up with a hundred other places, some really close ones like Haiti and San Salvador.
Liberals need to come up with solid plans and policy to fix our country, which they are sorely lacking.
It would not hurt for conservatives to do the same, and govern for the benefit of all, not just the 1%.
As an aside, no one is dying of hunger in Cuba and their health care is the best in the continent. I am not a fan of the Cuban system, but let us take the ideological blinders off.
5
Whether liberal or conservative, follow the money.
Where did the wealth go when Venezuela had large incomes from oil revenue?
Where did Hugo Chavez send millions of gallons of free oil (yes, free!) to help the poor in the wintertime? (Hint: a large country between Mexico and Canada).
Why has there been no returning favor of sending food and medicines to Venezuela? Whether left or right, what prevents our human decency from taking steps to ameliorate the suffering of ANY people, regardless of their government? The answer is simple: greed and the concentration of yet more wealth and power into the hands of a few.
6
The answer is simple: Maduro won't allow any relief supplies to enter the country.
2
Not true.
I doubt that, since Maduro has gone to the U.N. seeking help.
The Trump administration is trying to isolate Venezuela - and Cuba - using punitive methods. This diplomatic failure allows Russia and China to gain a stronger foothold in the western hemisphere - is that what is intended?
Maduro may be a despot, but we should not be ignoring the PEOPLE of Venezuela - or Cuba, or anyplace else - solely due to spite. We have our own depot-in-training here; let's ignore him by giving private humanitarian aid wherever it is needed.
Mr. Stephens largely has it correct; the silence of many liberals is deafening. But it is also true that the American media, from the Times to the Wall Street Journal, has well covered the horrible tragedy that is Venezuala. A tragedy all the more agonizing because Venezuala, with its rich petroleum resources, should be a vibrant wealthy nation, the opposite of what it has become. Largely thanks to one man, leftist tyrant Maduro.
We know the problem, this question is what to do about it. Not too long ago this nation addressed an equally evil despot: Saddam Hussein. Mr. Hussein used torture, chemical weapons against civilian populations, and in spite of Iraq's oil wealth, kept his people in poverty. We did what was necessary to bring him down, including strong military action. And we succeeded.
Today, the liberals and the liberal press, very much including the Times, harshly and endlessly criticize the American government for ending the outrage that was the Hussein regime.
So, what are we to do against the brutal tyranny of Mr. Maduro? The economic sanctions imposed on Venezuala are likely hurting the civilian population far more than they harm Maduro and his cronies. One would guess the absence of food and basic medical necessities is in part a result of these sanctions.
I don't know the answer. But, perhaps we should tone down the liberal rhetoric so critical of our efforts in Iraq, which, though far from wholly successful, were well intentioned.
3
Ah, Maduro is no leftist. He's a fascist, like Trump. Don't fall for propaganda.
4
"Today, the liberals and the liberal press, very much including the Times, harshly and endlessly criticize the American government for ending the outrage that was the Hussein regime."
-------
No one was sorry, per se, to see Hussein go. The issue is that what followed has been an even worse disaster than Hussein was in the first place, extending much further than Iraq.
Context is everything.
2
Surely you must be joking when you say that 'critical rhetoric' needs to be toned down when applied to policies that you admit aren't successful but were 'well intentioned'. Whatever happened to 'America First' as the new Conservative rallying cry?
Here's my counter-argument. Let's pick and choose what we do based on cost/benefit and not feelings. Saddam was a bad guy, Maduro is as well. Those facts on their own don't make the case that it's in America's interests to intervene. Nor does it make the case that any particular intervention is going to lead to a better outcome than just staying out of it.
2
The situation in Venezuela is a natural result of the 'resource curse'. It is similar to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and other countries. A country has an abundance of natural resources. The government takes this largess and subsidizes everything for its people. It becomes corrupt over the wealth. When oil prices are high the government gets overconfident and strikes out agains international oil companies in their country, kicking them out and trying to nationalize. Then oil prices drop, reservoirs deplete, and the revenue to support the largess disappears. Also, refinery and oil output drops due to the loss of outside technology and support. The country then has to cut back on the subsidies, leaving its people outraged.
Venezuela's oil if very thick and costly to refine. That didn't matter when oil prices were $100 a barrel, but recent lows have made the oil unprofitable. The only way for a country to survive the resource curse is to invest in and diversify other industry before it is too late. Venezuela did not do that.
3
Actually, before Chavez came along, Venezuela had a wide variety of flourishing industries. Unfortunately, such industries were not compatible with the Bolivarian Revolution, and they have all gone bankrupt and closed.
2
Exactly. All expropriated.
This is what is known as a straw man arguement. Liberals do not protest because they support Maduro. In response I would say. I am a Liberal and I do not support the Maduro regime. There are many things that I do not support which I also do not protest.
There are many wrongs in this world that need righting. Would a repressive populist right wing regime be any better for the people of Venezuela.
3
Bravo Bret Stevens!!! We liberals need to hear what you have to say! You are a welcome addition to MSNBC. I particularly liked your comments on budget director Mullvany's observations on the new budget. His standing rose In my estimation as a result of your comments. Keep it up!!!!
2
Yes, the Chavez/Maduro regime has become indefensible. But the reason it gained a foothold in the first place is that Venezuelan democracy, such as it was, had allowed for massive wealth inequality with a large part of population living in third world conditions. Instead of asking campus activists to protest Maduro it would be better to encourage them to highlight the potential for social breakdown caused by such inequality, of which Trumpism is a clear warning sign in the American context.
3
I didn't need to speak up to get my country, the country where I live and vote, to oppose Maduro any more than I needed to speak up to get my country to oppose human rights abuses of the Soviet Union because it is, and was, already doing it. That is why the left does speak out about Israel, because our country and the world's powerful countries do nothing to stop their human rights abuses, in fact we encourage it.
3
I wouldn't presume to speak for all liberals, but I think it's a fair to say that liberals are opposed to authoritarian regimes, whether those regimes originated on the left or right of politics. The shuffling of despots into our despots and others is a peculiarly American conceit. If you arrive in Perdition, it doesn't matter which train you arrived on.
2
Also Venezuela, being a dictatorship, is fascist and thus right-wing in any case.
1
I'd like to agree with you, but the comments on Frank Bruni's column yesterday seem to indicate otherwise. People repeatedly sputtered protests that Kim Jong-Un's sister is not that bad, simply because she isn't Trump or some other willful denial that there are places outside of the US that are much, much worse. "Trump's just as bad" is the new liberal equivalent of the conservative refrain of, "but what about Hilary's emails?"
At present there is an active blockade of food and medicine where the victims are the Venezuelan people. But the blockade comes not from a foreign power, but rather from the Venezuelan regime itself. Even if people are starving and dying, the regime prevents humanitarian aid coming from outside the country. It wants the population to depend solely on the regime so that the people may be grateful to it, the very idea of the Stockholm syndrome where the victims are thankful to their kidnappers.
Cuba has effectively invaded Venezuela with its distorted ideology. Millions of Venezuelans have fled the country. We do not want another invasion, military in nature, to free us from this situation; in the 1989-90 invasion of Panama thousands died to get to just one thug.
But we need outside help right now. The Berlin blockade and airlift of 1948-49 is a good precedent that might help us in more than one way in this situation. Food and medicine would be parachuted down to open spaces in needy areas for as long as it takes to remedy the situation. This would save lives instead of killing them. It would also lift the spirit of a captive and dispirited population as another step to an eventual liberation. It is important that in this airlift participate a coalition of countries through the United Nations.
4
How does one initiate such an endeavor.
I agree with the author in that “More effective are U.S. sanctions on Venezuelan government officials, which target the guilty and spare the innocent.” But sanctions are not being imposed only by the U.S. but also by the European community. China should also join in following its own internal anti-corruption campaign.
Two years ago Jorge Giordani and Hector Navarro, ex finance ministers of the Chavez and the Maduro government, denounced that in a period of a decade about 300 billion dollars were embezzled under their watch. One can only guess how much more has been misappropriated in the 19 years of the regime’s existence. “Thieves lack an ideology,” Navarro stated at that time. No wonder the regime has made an extraordinary effort to overturn the sanctions.
The focus should not be to punish the guilty but rather to get that money back to the country to pay the large debt that largely financed the corruption and to jump start the Venezuelan economy. The amount embezzled in ten years is equal to $10,000 for every man, woman and child living in Venezuela. At the official Dicom exchange rate the minimum wage is equal to $32 per month, and at the black market rate the minimum wage is $3.35 per month. It would take many years to earn $10,000 with a minimum wage.
1
When US oil companies lose big bucks as a result of Venezuelan stupidity, greed and incompetence, Maduro will be toast. If Chavez hadn't croaked from natural causes, he was headed for another grave he would so amply fill. Maduro is next once American oil figures out who will make a suitable and pliable replacement. For decades, there have been no coherent, American political thoughts from either the left or the right concerning Central or South America. With the possible exception of NAFTA, neither Clinton, Bush nor Obama did bupkis. They let the oil companies sort out Brazil and Venezuela. They let Wall Street sort out Argentina.
8
Actually, all the oil companies were thrown out of Venezuela a long time ago. The government has been running the oil industry itself for decades. That's why little oil is now being produced, although all the employees of the oil company are dedicated revolutionaries.
3
Guys, Guys... US oil companies are not doing business in Venezuela in any significant way since 1976... which was at least 20 years before Chavez.... starting a statement like that shows little if any knowledge of what's truly going on. This is readily available on Wikipedia. PDVSA purchased CITGO well before Chavez took power because they (as good capitalists) understood the value of vertical integration and the power of the american distribution network. The Citgo network is now handled by Maduro's cronies. This is "cronyism" (not socialism) at home and capitalism abroad.
Puff piece at its core. Faulting the failure of others to extend their moral indignation in all directions at once is easy criticism.
If diffusion of crises is one problem, information is another. Perhaps Mr. Stephens wants to focus his next six columns on particular issues and concrete suggestions for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela. Or would that seem odd given all else that deserves his moral indignation?
5
Duh, we usually invade a country, marketed as, protecting our interest. We do not need Venezuelan oil any longer, so , no interest to protect. A very wonderful people, but if you've noticed, immigration is a no no. Poor soulsdare going to Columbia as long as Columbia can absorb them.
3
Colombia
Your Knowledge of Venezuela's real situation can be summarized in one word you use, "Columbia".
1
It's Colombia. Not Columbia. Columbia is a University in New York City.
And by the way... the Colombian-Venezuelan border is quite active and decent, as borders go. Way back then when Colombia was in trouble there were some 2,000,000 Colombians living in Venezuela.
This is a specious column at best. I know a large number of "liberals" and all of them care about the tragedy in Venezuela, so I don't know where Stephens is coming from. From what I can tell, it is not even on the radar of most of the Republicans I know.
10
I, too, am mystified by Stephen's piece. The shenanigans in Venezuela are hardly standard practice in the left's playbook, as Stephen's implies. Maduro is a good old-fashioned dictator, much the way Trump would like to be. As a liberal I deplore the actions of both of them.
2
Where are the conservatives? The family-values people who are content to watch other people starve? Where are the conservatives? Or is writing an inane op-ed piece the conservative contribution? Where are all Stephen's right-wing heroes on this? Why aren't any of his heroes in the White House (not Trumpy, we know), the big-spending republicans, not doing something to help? No, wait, they're first attempting to deprive the economically middle, lower and impoverished classes here of access to a good life. Their ideal of empathy is to make us like Venezuela. With a figure-head president and congress that is run by a small group of corporations and wealthy people.
17
Would that we could translate that lack of caring to the Middle East. Then perhaps we'd be getting somewhere.
1
Memo to Bret:
We are not Venezuela.
4
Geez Bret, you sure had to go a long ways to find a way to mock liberals. Really, we get it, you are a conservative, you hate the left, and you are just making temporary partnerships with them to hasten Trump's fall.
It is a favorite tactic of the cheap shot right to hate on colleges, and this is kind of a cheap shot. The Republican own both houses of Congress and the White House, so appealing to them might make some sense. What on earth can a simple college student do in a country that is led by the far right...your party. Take the Senate to task, take the House to task, but mocking simple college students for not enmeshing themselves in a miserable situation they have no control over...
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
205
Though left-leaning myself, I disagree with your criticism of Bret's column. The left has always been selective as to which oppressive regimes it will decry. Example A would have to be Stalin's Russia under whose brutal leadership 20 million people were killed (not including the 20 million Soviet troops and civilians who died in WWII). Though I admired his later environmental work, Pete Seeger was an avid supporter of Stalin in the 50's. To his credit, the folk singer later realized how wrong he had been, apologizing in his 1997 autobiography
1
Are you really criticizing college aged liberals for not protesting something college aged conservatives are also not protesting?
10
I don't know why others are not going nuts over Venezuela, but I'll tell you why I am not. It isn't because the left wing government was ever the darling of anybody.
It is because there is just too much to do right here at home. Clean up your own mess first, then worry about everyone else's mess.
I am outraged by the plight of Venezuelans. I am outraged about the ethnic cleansing of the Yazidi; about the starvation of the people in South Sudan who are sitting atop oil; about the Rohinga; about people in warm climes here in the western hemisphere not having help to reduce Zika damage; about teh abject horror in Syria, and te return of th Taliban in Afghanistan.
But I am more outraged by my own people not having healthcare and good jobs. I am outraged that my own people have almost no rights in the face of corporate malfeasance, and less and less recourse. Equifax, anyone? I am outraged by a government that is targeting the elderly - who will be me - and looking to cut Social Security, even as they eliminated my pension, and left me at the mercy of a market designed for instability. And i am outraged by having a President who seems to really want to push the big red button.
Give us credit. We are just tired. We'll get to Venezuela when we make headway here.
180
People are dying of starvation and you are worried that someone's health insurance isn't good enough? (U. S. law: Hospitals are forbidden to turn away any emergency patient, and medicaid and CHIP are available to any poor person). Or you are worried that your defined benefit pension plan is replaced by a defined contribution plan? It reminds me of the people who thinks a destroyed palace is more of a tragedy than a destroyed peasant's hut. You have it backwards, and should be embarrassed by your selfishness.
4
Cathy, while genuine and true, It is 'Farewell to Syria' here in Our Country and unlikely that We will get to Venezuela. Puerto Rico remains in the Dark. When The Last President left Office, he took some hope away from us.
1
Stephens forfeits whatever minimal credibility he brings to this topic in at least two major ways: He takes the disingenuous path of placing responsibility for dealing with Venezuela's crisis with America's "liberals" while neglecting to mention the relentless and open hostility visited upon the Chávez-Maduro regime by the US (See the failed 2002 coup).
Even more egregious is his callous and totally dishonest dismissal of the Palestinian rights struggle. Seriously Mr. Stephens, is there no parallel between the plight of blacks in apartheid South Africa and that of Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories?
7
So 'liberals' are just as morally derelict as authoritarians like Pence because equivalence. Got it.
Whataboutism answers a question that has not been asked while defending a position that is indefensible. The Times conservative pundits really need to do better than this.
3
Is the author surprised by the lack of action by all the champagne socialists he cited? He is right in saying that the destruction of people's lives, of a country's economy and social fabric is always ok to the left, so long as it is done by one of their own. Why would they be fair and even handed in their assessment of the utter failures of most, if not all, socialist countries when hypocrisy is the stock in trade for most left wing intellectuals?
4
Where are the conservatives? It's ridiculous to blame "liberals" for a lack of concern about Venezuela, when there's no conservative concern either.
And then what would you have the United States do? Remember "you break it, you own it?" Venezuela is not Grenada.
2
So now the American right, in the person of Bret Stephens, is offering democracy lessons to liberals?
You'd never guess, listening to this denunciation of moral turpitude, that the region has a "history" with the U.S., and in particular with the Republican party. Where were these right-wing lovers of democracy during the dirty-wars, torture chambers and death squads of the 70s and 80s, which prevailed throughout Latin America?
Or take the instant example. Not so long ago, the editorial writers of this very newspaper lauded a military coup against a democratically elected government in Venezuela, only to sheepishly retract its cheering, when the coup failed, due to popular resistance.
So Bret? Where were you when it mattered? Cheering the generals?
6
On America's murdering of it own children, where are liberals? Where are conservatives? Where is the president? Before we attempt to meddle in Venezuela's problem again let us help our own children. Perhaps it's time for us to ask some other country, a NATO country, perhaps, or China or Russia, even, to help us get our priorities in order and save our own children. We have famously preached our vision of the world to others. Maybe it is time for us to let them help us. We have failed our children. The most unsafe place in this country is a school.
45
...most unsafe place ... school.
And who runs, and has been running for decades. those schools?
Liberal ideologues.
I suspect you are referring to all the mass shootings? Unclear from your post. As for where are the liberals, we've been very vocal and consistent. Common sense gun control - blocked every time by the Republicans.
3
"The most unsafe place in this country is a school."
No, that would be a hospital, where medical mistakes take far more lives than any gunman.
Naomi Klein? Danny Glover?
1
I wonder how many of the people who opine here have read Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine or David Talbot's The Devil's Chessboard, to mention just two books that could help them understand what goes on in the world.
I read conservative writers and ponder their arguments. your typical "liberal" has enough with The New Yorker and other publications like it.
Students here are confronting their own charismatic "cult of personality" would be despot and president who promised to end the "carnage" and upend the "system" for his "forgotten" base, who attacks the free press as "the enemy of the people", who says his violent street agitator supporters are "fine people", who leads chants to "lock up" political opponents, who says he wants to control the justice department, who concocts wild conspiracy theories to divert attention from his crimes, looting and failures, who refuses to release his financial information, who creates social coherence with overt bigotry and racism, who "breaks norms", who enriches himself and his cronies while draining the Treasury, who lies constantly, who wants to pack the courts with toadies to approve his non-democratic schemes, and who ignores science and reality. Students are in fact seeing America become Venezuela.
4
Of course, the Right, who are, after all, in control of the USA at the moment, could make some real effort of their own. All I hear is crickets.
1
Maduro is an opportunist. Like Mussolini, ideology is mutable in light of power. Venezuela is a dog's lunch under his purview. So far our system has held up fairly well against our own "dear leader." But the chisels are constantly gnawing away at the foundation. It is a shanda. Yet where is the outrage of this country supplying arms to the proto Al-Qaeda to fight a proxy war in Afghanistan during the Reagan administration. Or the NRA's influence in preventing federal funding on gun violence? There is plenty of outrage to go around. Ideology and big money are sand in the gears of moving on to something better.
1
All Americans regardless of nationality or political persuasion should wake up and realize that the government of Nicolas Maduro is a brutal dictatorship with a leftist populist bent. It is socialist in name only and uses its leftist discourse to justify itself to the masses of poor Venezuelans while its top officials enrich themselves with corruption, drug trafficking and thievery. The OAS and all its member states should have taken action to return Venezuela to democracy years ago.
2
American liberals are a bit tied up right now with what's going on in their own country. Maybe conservatives can handle something non-NIMBY related for once...
3
Mike Pence said something about Venezuela? I don't see a quote. What did he say that was so powerful? And is that all that conservatives need to do to win the moral high ground? One guy, saying... something?
Please Bret.
2
Thank you Bret Stephens! Where are the liberals when you really need them
to call out an horrific human tragedy in our Hemisphere. Are they ashamed at their many years of support for Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro?
As for the voices of academics and students, they are largely silent because so much of academic and university teaching today glorifies leftist economics and left leaning governments. What should be taught is where radical socialism can lead when it is unbridled as in Venezuela. Venezuela, you remember, was one of the wealthiest countries in Latin America, a breadbasket of prosperity. Today, thanks to "radical socialismo" its people are starving and it is a basket case of a country.
6
Mr. Stephens castigates liberal campus activists for failing to mount sustained protests against the Maduro regime. This raises an obvious question.
Why aren’t Young Republicans marching in the streets to save the people of Venezuela?
3
Because if young republicans try to march anywhere Antifa goons are after them, duh.
How can the Left criticize Maduro's economic policies that has brought Venezuela, a country with vast natural resources, to its knees?! All of Maduro's economic policies is right out of the standard Left playbook, of more government controls and intervention in the economy. Sure, I think everyone deplores the violent and corrupt political actions Maduro has adopted, but the problem is the solutions that will bring Venezuela back to prosperity is for the country to liberalize their economy, privatize nationalized businesses, reduce the burden of the state. There's no way Jeremy Corbyn can say that, because those are the exact opposite of things he wants to do.
It's easy to cheer the initial periods of great socialist expansion, which is what Klein, Penn, Greenwald, and the like have done, but Thatcher predicted what would happen to Venezuela and all countries that go down this path when she said, “The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.”
76
Indeed. Whenever there is a large concentration of wealth, particularly in the form of natural and fixed assets, the initial redistribution period of socialism always 'looks make glorious for great nation to pleasure for Western armchair leftist' :)
This is because the program runs down assets (temporarily inflating consumable output at the expense of the underlying asset structure, ensuring that their will be grave problems in the future), which energizes the populace (who experience a positive shock to income (*)). As the effects wear off the the competent managers are purged, the consumable output surge and productivity increases slow down... then stop... the run in reverse. As they reverse there is recrimination and the revolutionary leadership digs in its heals and pushes the economy into a death spiral.
Same old story.
* Remember that people will experience a given level of income differently depending on their recent past income. So part of the motivation from the higher income isn't in the increase in absolute level, but in the relative difference.
4
Ah, yes - that old chestnut from Maggie T.
You do realise that the "other people's money" was other people's money - right? I mean, "they've" got it 'cause there are other people, and they had money to spend. To bad they didn't have more because then "they'd" have more, then taxation revenue would be higher and tax rates could be dropped, then the "other people" would have more money and more of the other people's money so the "other people" would have more money still. Of course the other people the "other people" get their money from could hide their extra money in Bermuda rather than spending it on a new fridge or tv but it's the "other people" who do that usually not the other people.
You know what Sartre said about "other people" don't you? I don't think "other people" respect how much they owe to other people quite frankly. I don't think they respect them enough.
You do also realise that the "other people's money" is legal tender - printed and issued by their state? Thank goodness there's a government to do that - hey? Gold is heavy to carry - and there's only so much of it. And it costs money to print money you know. Just like it costs money to provide people with other essential services like schools and hospitals because "other people" don't pay them anywhere near enough to build their own. And just think about how much poorer "other people" would be if other people were too uneducated or too sick to work for them or buy their stuff?
Isn't social democracy great?
1
You easily forget that we have done just about everything in our power to bring down that government. We even supported its overthrow at one point.
2
Really. That's the timely issue today. Liberal campus activism. Right.
2
Impotent fist shaking from the sidelines has pretty much had its day. Why is Maduro is a bigger problem than Kabila? Or Duterete? Or Kadyrov? I think dealing with our multiple political crises at home is really more important. And considering our outsized influence on the world, more urgent.
1
Why don't you LIBERALS go pour your energy into THIS lost cause. Don't protest and put your energy into something where your efforts might have a result.. Please change the topic from things more comfortable to poor Bret and the nice conservatives. They are waiting to be able to respond to our concerns about something far away and not their fault. It is hard to need to keep responding things that close by and that they do have the power to oversee like the bumble a minute Trump administration.
2
On Saudi Arabia, where are Conservatives? On gun control, where are Conservatives? On institutional racism, on global warming, where are Conservatives? On equal rights for women, where are Conservatives?
Could Venezuela’s vast oil resources the cause of Conservative ire? Are Republicans appalled that a leftist regime controls so much oil?
Duterte murders thousands, Erdogan jails and tortures thousands, buys oil from ISIS, Sisi jails, tortures thousands, Putin attacks our democracy and continues to attack and where are the Conservaties. They are lamenting the loss of Venezuelan oil. Venezuela is being strangled by oligarchs who want the power and the oil. Venezuela is still rich but it is being crushed by Conserervative oil Barron’s.
5
Many American liberals, especially on the hard left, are very critical of American values and institutions. Therefore they admire the anti-American regimes in Cuba and Venezuela. Cuba especially has been a darling of the left for decades. No matter that it is a repressive military regime with a terrible human rights record, no freedom of expression, no freedom of movement, no economy to speak of, those are details -and besides, they are mostly America's fault! It's all about beating up on capitalism and the US, the real world plight of the Cubans and Venezuelans are of little or no interest.
88
Hey, but Michael Moore let us know about the good healthcare in Cuba. So capitalism bad, Cuba good.
5
Seriously?
And you get to decide what those "american values" are?
I am an American and am fully supportive of socialism, socialism is ingrained in American values going back well over 100 years. The New Deal, The Great Society, the labor union movement, the list goes on. It is easy to look at a failed state such as Venezuela and say "see, socialism has failed again" without offering anything positive and constructive. Scandinavia and much of Europe has very socialist policies and have been quite successful. No system is perfect and Venezuela is tragic to be sure but one could easily point to many failed capitalist states and say "see, capitalism is a failed concept."
Don't presume to know what "american values" are. You do not get to decide. We as a nation decide together, through our debates and elections just what that is.
2
But we support the repressive nations of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.
1
i am inspired! this gives me, an avowed progressive, an idea. under the trump/Pence banner we could invade, overthrow the evil dictator Maduro and liberate the venezuelan oil fields. the people of Venezuela would greet us as liberators and the oil we seize would pay for the invasion. what could go wrong?
10
We humans struggle to deal with our own hypocrisy. This was a well-spoken Opinion piece. Thank you.
4
Stephens nails it again. What's especially sad is that there used be to a strong faction of center-left liberals, exemplified by Marty Peretz's New Republic, that were willing to turn a critical eye towards the excesses of the radical left, in particular its disastrous embrace of socialism.
Alas, as the American left has become increasingly radicalized (John Kennedy would be turning in his grave if he knew Democrats nearly nominated for president a pro-Castro socialist) that more moderate element has nearly disappeared.
Of course the radical left (which increasingly just means the left period) doesn't want anyone paying attention to Venezuela. The debacle in Venezuela shows the bankruptcy of the fundamental tenet of the radical left's ideology, i.e. that capitalism is the source of all evil, and socialism is the solution.
96
The real left does want for people to pay attention to Venezuela, close attention to how the so called democrats have sabotaged the attempts of a people to create a more just society where the masses have access to quality education, health care, etc. Those who cannot accept that the country's natural resources be at the service of workers and not of a privileged minority have obstructed the import and circulation of basic consumer products to create scarcity, sabotaged the local currency with a black market operating from Colombia, organized an international media campaign against the government, killed and burned people alive for being supporters of the government. And who is leading all this? Those who overthrew Allende, Celaya, Juan Bosch, Arbenz, and many others, the champions of the "free world", the ones that are still trying to impose in Cuba a government they can manipulate at will.
6
As a Vermont liberal horrified by what is happening in Venezuela, I'm glad for this excellent Op-ed.... and I wonder what Bernie is doing about the situation.
Thank you!
6
Have to disagree. Today's liberal agenda is pretty moderate and certainly not that different from what Lyndon Johnson supported. It's the right that has become extremist - and to use a variant on your comment, Reagan is probably turning in his grave.
4
It may have escaped Bret's attention but the"liberals" are not in charge of this country nor its foreign policy.
The Republicans are in control. Where is the moral outrage that our SOS has done nothing, Congress has done nothing and of course the POTUS has done nothing?
Where are Stephens' charges of moral dedication against those Republicans who hold the levers of power in this country?
Is it because Republicans moved our embassy to Jerusalem that Stephens gives them a pass and chooses to beat up on college students?
The moral equivalence that Stephens makes between the non actions of college liberals and the non actions of the Republican government relative to the situation in Venezuela is not only false but extremely intellectually faulty.
5
The formula for a Bret Stephens column - open mouth, insert foot, and show how much he despises Palestinians just for the heck of it. I wonder why Mr. Stephens finds the Palestinian cause "perennially unworthy"? That would be an interesting question to ask, just to see how easily Mr. Stephens could rationalize the oppression and brutalization of a group of oppressed and discriminated against people. But let's talk about Venezuela: the United States has been responsible for numerous genocides, military coups and other forms of gross oppression and political interference in Latin America over the course of two centuries (or longer). Maybe it's not a good idea for an American -especially a conservative American columnist whose attitudes are already highly suspect -to say anything about the region at all. At least not without acknowledging the grotesque American history in the region first.
4
When I was in college we were busy protesting the US invasion of Iraq. I think we had the right focus.
It's generally not necessary to cherry-pick foreign issues to protest. There's a lot to worry about closer to home. For example, Puerto Ricans are starving, many still lack water and basics such as antibiotics, and hundreds of thousands are fleeing Puerto Rico. But why Bret's relative silence? Maybe because Republicans are responsible... How many more people have to starve or drown before they do more than shake their heads?
5
What is in common between the list of causes that Stephens says that "young activists" generally do embrace, and differentiates them from those which that they do not embrace?
The embraced causes involve scenarios in which said activists see a clear path to exert leverage without the use of major military force, typically in the form of utilizing US economic power or the encouraging of a UN peace-keeping mission (however misguided that may be).
The unembraced causes (particularly the ones that Stephens lists) all involve countries where the US has no major economic leverage (or has already been using sanctions and embargos for years or decades) and/or any intervention would necessarily amount to war.
Nobody has a particularly clear idea of what should happen in Venezuela. Whether you support the ideology that Maduro claims to represent, or whether you consider him and his regime to be ruthless despots indifferent to the suffering of their country, you almost certainly have no idea precisely what Venezuela should do. The situation there is complex, a confluence of politics, corruption, bad management and global petro-markets.
Instead of chastizing liberals for not embracing causes that are not amenable to simple, non-violent interventions, why don't you suggest precisely what YOUR plan for Venezuela is? As you note yourself, sanctions are not a sure fire approach here. So what is?
144
What Venezuela should do: Free elections. The people would elect a government responsive to their needs.
Whatever was wrong with Venezuela before Chavez and Maduro, no one starved. From that base it could work on its genuine problems.
2
The first economic sanctions were imposed on Venezuela on Aug 25 2017. They only prohibit US persons buying Venezuelan debt. The USA is Venezuela’s largest Trading partner, and the largest purchaser of Venezuela’s oil. There is plenty of leverage to be applied.
3
Another way to phrase this is that the US puts pressure on liberal democracies with open trade, and does not put pressure on closed authoritarian regimes. Sort of like the drunk man searching for his keys under the light post, because he can see. And not in the dark where he actually dropped the keys.
Explainable, but not very smart.
1
It is really extraordinary that Venezuela's government has survive the brutal campaign against its economy: its currency, its imports, its foreign credit and the propaganda campaign by the world's capitalist press, the violence led by its privileged oligarchy and supported by the U.S. and its allies. There are going to be presidential elections there soon. The government has invited observers from world countries, especially the U.S. Send them,watch carefully. I predict Maduro will win.
3
No, you don't say?
Having banned all opposition parties, Maduro's victory is assured.
What have you been drinking/smoking to think this man is honest?
I've noticed that with many on the Left, oppression is somehow more condemnable when it's done by a Western/American/European entity against a non-western one. Thus Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is more censurable than any other Arab or Asian state's oppression. Christopher Columbus must be excoriated for conquest & exploitation when the indigenous Americans whose displacement he inaugurated were guilty of the exact same things. Thus the West is singled out for the stain of slavery when the institution was just as widely practiced (and in many places still is) throughout the global South. Whether this is driven by a sense of guilt over our prosperity or a subliminal tendency to sympathize with history's underdogs, it's hard to say. Regardless, it's neither an objective nor consistent perspective.
5
"How many more Venezuelans have to starve or drown before Western liberals do something more than merely shake their heads?" Given your position as a voice of the right, why would you not take a stronger stand about the lack of outrage from the Republican leadership of the House, Senate, White House? IT seems this is a means of protecting your political colleagues from moral responsibility.
127
You responded to a question with a question that is totally off the point.
3
Bret, how many American children have to die from being shot with assault rifles? How many seniors have to worry about their only stable source of income (Social Security) and their only affordable health care (Medicare) being on the chopping block? How many dark-skinned people have to tread on eggshells for fear of offending someone whose racism has been encouraged by the current Republican president? How many more people will become homeless because of opportunistic landlords gouging them on rent? How many millennials have to postpone home ownership and marriage because of a double whammy of low pay and high student loan obligations?
What are the Republicans going to do about any of this, which, as the party in total control of the Federal government, is their first responsibility?
Bull's eye! The question I'd like to ask Stephens is: why are College Republicans so consumed with bringing in controversial speakers with their dog-whistles to the alt-right? Why aren't they organizing and protesting against, say, the Venezuelan regime? Is campus protest only for the left?
My sense is that College Republicans are learning how GOP politics are done: stir the pot in public and in private, mingle with influential folks, focus on career opportunities (internships with GOP politicians), etc.
Fair points. The reason for Chavez primarily lies in the oligarchical structure of Venezuelan society. A few immensely wealthy families controlled most of the money and made sure they kept it. The great mass of people had no opportunity to do better. It was foreseeable that someone like Chavez would get control and start giving things away. “Good” revolutions have started this way. It’s understandable that champions of democracy would have had hope for the future of the country. This one went completely off the rails by eating its own productive capacity. Chavez was smart, determined, and lucky, and never relented. The result is total disaster.
61
That explanation reads like an excuse. It was obvious over a decade ago where Chavez was taking the country.
1
"The reason for Chavez primarily lies in the oligarchical structure of Venezuelan society. A few immensely wealthy families controlled most of the money and made sure they kept it. The great mass of people had no opportunity to do better."
You could be talking about the U.S., too, with this statement. (Obviously, excepting the references to Chavez and Venezuelan society.
Hello Alex, it seems you have some incorrect information. Please note: 1) "immensely wealthy families controlled most of the money" That is incorrect; the Venezuelan government has been in control of around 85% of all money in the country ever since 1973 and that has not change until this day. 2) "Chavez would get control and start giving things away" Social housing, Free education and Free health care, all existed in Venezuela by law ever since 1961; Chavez did not bring any of that, although, instead he built a huge propaganda apparatus to give the impression he invented free health, free education and social housing. Big news outlets were created and funded with public money and with international coverage and the blessing of the Cuban regime (TV station TeleSur is part of it). 3) There was never a "good" revolution. Chavez was a criminal. He was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of people, first during the riots of 1989 and then during two coups in 1992. He went to jail but then was let go free for the political convenience of socialist sector in the country. The situation Venezuela suffers today is all due to the wrong policies of Hugo Chavez. The difference is, when he was president a barrel of oil cost USD 100, so there was enough money to cover all the holes and problems his policies were creating.
2
Sanctions aren't the solution. They only weaken the populace which should be strengthened—the better to mount opposition. Consider humanitarian airdrops of food, medical supplies, etc to the most stricken areas. Make Venezuelans fans of America for the aid and support rather than building resentment for encouraging austerity.
South America as a whole has benefited greatly by the declining degree of US involvement in their affairs. After we helped instigate a coup against Salvador Allende of Chile, Chile suffered a decade of brutal suppression under Augusto Pinochet. Almost every country of Central America has felt the not so gentle hand of the US "making things right". And then of course there is Haiti. Unless we're willing to invade Venezuela, liquidate the Maduro regime, and occupy it for decades like we're done in Germany and Japan, we'd best accept that what we have now is about the best we're going to get.
4
The big problem is demonstrated here in the comments of the few. Where is the outrage, where is the empathy, where is the real concern for the vast majority of Venezuelans whose lives have been so severely damaged by the tyranny of Maduro and his associates? The situation reminds me of the incident where a person gets killed in the corner of a big city but no one steps in because they don’t want to get involved and have to deal with it. A case of “it’s not my problem.”
5
THANK YOU, BRET
Venezuela's agony is an example what CNN sacrifices by devoting its time to 25 panels on Trump's destructiveness instead of one panel on that and then some of the rest of the world's news.
You talk in terms of liberals and others; but, IMHO, the real issue is the gravitational pull of our own national tragedy preventing anything else from receiving our attention.
This is but one of the effects of Trump's putrid, Putinesque destructiveness of our nation, our norms, our economy, and our very social fabric.
6
Chavez was never good grounds for any kind of liberal or sensible Left cause. However, he had roots in four-decade failure of the Venezuelan democracy to escalate the "resource curse" and use its massive oil revenues finance the basis for sustained economic growth and an even moderately egalitarian society. Further, the catastrophic economic conditions of the last couple of years )with their grave exacerbation under Maduro of political polarization and the Chavista response intensified authoritarianism) are not a simple result of Chavista incompetence and predation. They were largely impelled by the perfect storm of Chavista populist redistribution and incompetence AND the collapse of oil prices precipitated across the world by a Saudi price deflation aimed at Iran.
4
The tragedy of Venezuela as well as Cuba certainly merits greater coverage and indignation from human rights activists. The question is why isn't it happening. The reason is that there is a lack of trust in the opposition politicians because of the history of corrupt and heartless capitalist politicians and military dictators across Latin America aided and abetted by the CIA and hypocritical politicians from the USA. No one seems to know whom to trust anymore when there is nothing but corruption right, left, and center. For the same reason nothing any US politician or activist groups say carry much weight either, certainly not Naomi Klein, Sean Penn, or Mike Pence. There is no quick fix, but the solution might lie in celebrating and encouraging regional leadership especially from bright spots in recent years in Chile, Uruguay, Costa Rica, and Colombia, to engage more in promoting and supporting democracy and human rights across Latin American.
1
The fact of China's deep ties with us, a rush of profit seeking with the
COMMUNISTS looks like what might be called economic alliance. All this happens while we isolate a few communists in our backyard for imaginary political gains. There is no consistency to our thinking on the subject. Some misbegotten idealism condemns those we don't like to being our enemies.
Sad to say that it's difficult for us to have moral outrage for Venezuela, or any other crisis situation around the world, when we're fighting against becoming a third world dictatorship ourselves. Trump and the gop has provided so much outrage in this country that we have none leftover for others.
Look at how the Trump administration has eroded our trust and standing in the world... who are we to take the moral high ground and dictate policy to any other country? Maybe at one time, but not now.
Btw... why is it that only liberals need to be outraged over Venezuela? Are conservatives too busy spending their money from tax cuts and deporting dreamers (some to Venezuela)?
256
What a cop out. The worst kind. The lack of empathy (and OUTRAGE!) on the U.S. left regarding Venezuela extends years prior to Trump announcing his candidacy. Even then Venezuela was sliding into totalitarianism and depression.
Just as the Republicans have amply displayed their lack of true moral backbone through their obsequence to Trumpism and their sudden - shock, shock! - lack of care about budget deficits, so too the so-called "left" in U.S. politics long ago gave up any perceived moral high ground.
5
what passed for your excuse when Obama and Bush were in Office?
3
This pretty much sums up how this liberal feels.
There's really no reason for anyone - left, right, center, or whatever - not to protest the aforementioned regimes. In order for any government to be free and fair, be it more left-leaning or right-leaning, it needs free and fair elections. It needs an independent judiciary, a separate legislature, and checks and balances. Those regimes lack one to all of these necessities. It's not socialism, per se. Liberals should never wave the hammer and sickle, because it's not representative of liberalism or socialism. It's totalitarianism. The distinction is easy to make. There should be no awkward moments.
7
(I hate the terms "liberal" and "conservative" because the meanings can change over time. No one truly knows what they mean.) Like a true Cold War "conservative," Mr. Stephens tries to align "liberals" with socialism. The reality is that the situation in Venezuela is tragic, but there is not much the US can do unless it wants to attack in the way of the 1980s, and we all know how those events turned out. American "liberals" support a range of social democracy that looks after the poor, the young, and the old in America. Amerian "liberals" generally do not support tyrannical socialist governments.
12
And yet he is correct that the left-wing establishment in the US and Europe, from Hollywood to Jeremy Corbyn, actively cheered on Hugo Chavez and the Chavismo policies that led to this moment. The liberal left does not protest the political prisoners of North Korea or Cuba; if it has anything to say at all, it encourages closer and friendlier relations with these dictatorships. The hypocrisy is evident. The political left in this country really doesn't care about human rights, or about the fate of people subjected to the inevitable failures of a heavy-handed state intent on controlling the economy (and the people). They think rich people should be forced to give more money to poorer people like themselves, and are prepared to abandon democracy, freedom, and any other sort of human right if they can get the redistribution that they are after. Tragically short-sighted and blind to the lessons of history.
1
Much of Puerto Rico is without electricity. Where is Mike Pence? DACA was rescinded by Trump. Where are conservative columnists? Congress just gave the wealthy an enormous tax break, including favors to corporations which will not expire, and the military an enormous budget boost, raising the US deficit beyond anything ever imagined. Where is the GOP leadership? - firmly celebrating its actions as the great achievement of 2017. 17 high school students mowed down by a 19year old with automatic weapons in Florida. Where is the governmental outrage? Basking in the campaign contributions of the NRA.
32
Thank you for this.
I would strongly suggest that to Mr. Stephens that, with Trump as the chaos president, liberals have not conceded any moral high ground, nor are they derelict regarding foreign policy. They are appropriately riveted on the moral slum-dweller Trump and focused to the point of exhaustion on limiting the damage he can do within the country that so sadly elected him - with, let's never forget, fewer votes than his more worthy opponent.
19
It's not about Trump. Everything Stephens has to say about liberal attitudes to left-wing despots was true throughout the Obama administration.
The people of Venezuela are starving and are dying from lack of medicines. And it is true that their government has caused this tragedy, but now we share the shame of letting this go on by our failure to recognize that the lack of food and medicine is because of our boycott and restricted trade.
I appreciate this article for calling attention to the strife of Venezuelan people but why aren't we sending aid to the people of Venezuelans that include the protesters we encouraged.
14
Actually it is truer that the shortages in Venezuela are directly tie to our efforts at economic disruption. Any honest student of history knows the pattern and plan well. We did the same thing in Chile and Indonesia prior to our installation of brutal dictatorships.
1
I believe the government has refused aid. Am I correct ?
Okay, Bret, I'll take the bait. I'm fairly liberal. Let's open our borders to Venezuelan refugees as a humanitarian act. As long as Congress and Trump are on a big spending and tax cutting binge, let's float $30 billion to Venezuela to stabilize their health and food crises. Let's create incentives for U.S. manufacturers to set up shop in Venezuela to create a more stable economy there. Instead of building a wall on our southern border, let's use that money to help Venezuela get back on its feet. Now that our own economy is humming along I can't think of a better time to help some people who aren't American citizens.
There, I got that statement out to the world. As a liberal in the Trump era, I'm sure it'll be so well received.....btw....what does Mike Pence suggest we should do about the situation?
96
Great reply! That's as good an idea as sending aid to North Korea. Of course in either case the top government elites will confiscate the aid. They will do well but their citizens will still starve.
The answer is sanctions against individuals in the Venezuela regime. That's what Trump did. In January four more Venezuelan officials responsible for repression in that country were added to the sanctions list. If there is going to be regime change it has to come from the Venezuelan people.
3
Do you think Maduro will take our money? He has other countries that will help.
Why is this aimed at "liberals"? I haven't seen anyone, liberal or conservative, deal with Venezuela, and last I checked it's the conservatives who are in power. They seem to be more interested in passing tax cuts for themselves and trying to take away health care than they are in Maduro.
Worthy cause, Venezuela. But you're using it as a disingenuous excuse to shift the focus towards people who are not the problem in our country right now.
83
The left is being singled out because for 15 years (until recently) the left, as personified by Corbyn, Klein, Penn, Glover et al., actively supported Venezuela's left-wing populists. Now that the country has been led into the trashcan, as the right predicted 15 years ago, the silence from the left is deafening. Where is the mea culpa?
5
Marco Rubio has attempted to take action. And Robert Menéndez.
2
As Matt Carnicelli says, we don't have a good record of making things better when we intervene abroad. Quite the reverse, in fact. Hugo Chávez's regime was a direct outgrowth of the failure of the previous democratic regime. He massively improved the lot of the poorest Venezuelans, but failed to transform an economy totally dependent on petroleum exports. He adopted a model of illiberal democracy which has been completely prostituted by his successor, Maduro, who has steered the economy into a death spiral. Maduro and his regime will fall, but the last thing the Venezuelans need is a successor regime identified as having been sponsored and installed by the US. Back in the good old days of US imperialism in Latin America, the CIA would be discreetly pulling strings, with plausible deniability, to bring down Maduro. But no secret is safe these days. We should let the Venezuelans deal with their problems.
21
This commenter is spot-on! Any U.S. intervention in the affairs of a Latin American country is going to be suspect due to our history in that part of the world. Add to that the has we have made of our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan and there is quite a record of failure that needs to be reckoned with.
Fortunately, the Organization of American States has stepped up its game on Venezuela and the U.S. seems to have decided to let the OAS take the lead (since Trump seems to hate our diplomatic corps, this is probably the best that we can do) and we have imposed sanctions on Maduro and his cronies personally that new beginning to have some bite.
Probably the biggest stick in the arsenal of tools to use against the Maduro junta is the price of oil. PDVSA, the national oil company, is failing due to its inability to maintain and update its pumping and refining capacity. As Venezuela's sole source of foreign exchange, Maduro has been diverting the revenue to prop up his regime and reward his supporters. The combination of relatively low oil prices and declining capacity are quickly strangling the Venezuelan economy. If you want to do something personally to hasten the fall of the Maduro government, stop buying your gasoline from the U.S. arm of PDVSA - CITGO.
1
What improvements do you speak of? People waiting on line for rationed food with armed gurards at the door of the grocery store? It’s not that he failed to transform the economy, he wiped it out. He didn’t fail to change the mono-economy, he encouraged it. Yes Maduro prostitutes but Chavez was the teacher. We are simple minded here in the states. Blinded by ideals that are born of plenty. I am no conservative, but the ultra-left is eerily silent on what is utter devastation. The arterial bleed began with Chavez. Maduro is finishing the job. It not the fault of “liberals” that Venezuela has imploded, but when one opines about the ills of capitalism (of which there are many) and claims that the virtues of Chavismo is saving the poor (which it is not) a self correction is in order. And if we cannot help Venezuela directly, we must help indirectly. What that entails I’m not sure. But I suspect that left wing voices should at least speak out against dictatorship, censorship, corruption, and alas expropriation of private enterprise. . The ultra-left wanted to speak out in favor of the failed health clinics for the poor, now they should not get a free pass on the aftermath. Everyone should speak out. These are our neighbors. And look who is sopping up the blood of the bleed. We should all wake up.
1
Hard to disagree with Mr. Stephens on this point. The silence is especially glaring from those who praised Chavez. But why must it be only 'liberal' college students standing up for human rights? Don't conservative students also have an obligation? Venezuela's descent into anarchy should be a concern for everybody.
34
I’m too busy. Aren’t you?
I have never, ever heard anyone praise Hugo Chavez.
Have you been to a college campus in the last generation? Only the left is permitted to speak; all others are shouted (and occasionally beaten) down and silenced.
4
In $country, where are $side?
Nothing seems to sour political discourse more than a conversation about Venezuela. Whenever Venezuela is brought up, unimaginative stock characters seem to come out of the woodwork to either praise or denounce socialism with all the smugness of somebody typing in comfort thousands of miles away from suffering and starvation.
The problem with Venezuela is not right-versus-left, and commentators do themselves a disservice by framing the discussion that way. The real problem is competence-versus-incompetence.
Mao Zedong, Silvio Berlusconi, Juan Peron, Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez, Nicolas Maduro and our homegrown pal Donald Trump have wildly different political views, but the results from all of these leaders are the same: too much power, too much incompetence, and the result is human suffering.
26
That may be why we don’t hear from Sean Penn anymore. There is no more bragging to be done about the promises of Chavismo.
1
Perhaps the answer is that we've learned from hard experience the limitations of America trying to solve all the problems of bad governments around the world. At the present time we have our own bad government to contend with.
14
Venezuela is in our backyard.
Interesting take, Bret. I do agree that the crisis is Venezuela is under-reported and certainly not taken seriously enough by our government. Part of the problem has been a lack of will by other South American countries to act more decisively. Your criticism of university liberals is a little unfair. There is not much point in protesting about North Korea or Syria. Our government is well aware of those situations which do not have a simple or elegant solution. There is not much to ask for. I realize the hippie college liberals would have more free time to raise awareness on Venezuela between their poetry or women studies classes than busy CEOs from companies like Haliburton, Ford, Chevron and Exxon-Mobil who do business with Venezuela and help to prop up Maduro. But, as Matt Carincelli points out, the difference between now and when apartheid in South Africa was being protested on campus, has a lot to do with our own backyard. We are in a bigger crisis with Trump and his Republican enablers than many would like to admit. As a country, I am afraid, we will not be able to be a moral beacon or aid in building democracy until we fix ours. That issue seems to be the one energizing liberals on college campuses.
32
I commend Bret Stephens for not choosing a clickbait topic. The Times should be giving more prominence to its coverage of Venezuela.
31
It's just plain hypocrisy. The left loves anything socialism, communism, as it is a pretext to condemn American patriotism.
As long also as it does not infringe on their privileges.
Have a look at NYC. Their champion Diblasio is building appartement complexes for the homeless in rich neighborhoods. The uproar! Of course the well todo want to force the masses to accept what they would never accept themselves.
It does partly explain the silence regarding Venezuela.
If you denounce a corrupt dictator like Madura, you have to denounce all your former beliefs.
How many on the left just love Cuba, after all, don't they have socialized medicine?
How many again on the left just love multiculturalism and affordable housing. Look where these apologists of diversity and socialism live.
Far, far from anything resembling what they applaud.
They are silent now? I hope, but doubt it's out of shame.
5
I visited Venezuela on a business trip before Chavez. As you know it is an oil-rich country, once with great wealth.
On the way in to Caracas from the airport, the cab passed a large hill covered with hand-made misshapen hovels from bottom to top, where people lived. I asked one of the women at the meeting about it and she said that her maid, who lived there, would wake up her children at night when it rained to stand in the doorway, as she was afraid that they would be crushed in their beds if an avalanche of mud came down the hillside, something that had happened before. So, you can see why, ignoring such pain, conditions were ripe for a despot like Chavez to emerge.
But as for why liberals don't protest Maduro yet did protest apartheid in South Africa: stop with your morality play. The answer is very obvious. With South Africa, we were protesting American companies that were complicit with the South African regime (note that your sainted Ronald Reagan supported the regime, attacked Mandela as a Communist and criticized those who opposed the regime) http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24760045.html
Those of us who care for human rights are heartbroken, but are you claiming that marching around a campus in the US, making ourselves feel good, will convince Maduro and his fellow self-enriching grifters (sort of like the Trump administration if left to their own devices) to start caring about human rights in Venezuela?
145
True that Maduro is not to be convinced of anything. But at minimum a position on he matter should be stated. To opine that Chavismo is great and then become silent at the time of economic collapse is cowardly. At the least, a stand should be stated. There are ways to send private aid to Venezuelan people. And they do need it. Venezuela is our geopolitical neighbor. If not for altruistic reasons, we should help for selfish ones. It’s just stupid not to try to change things there.
4
“…Venezuela … it is an oil-rich country, once with great wealth…”
Before Chavez Venezuela was producing 4 million barrels of oil per day with an export price of some $10 per barrel and a cost of $3 per barrel. Interest and amortization on the foreign debt were the equivalent of $1 per barrel. With a population of 25 million, that works out to $1 per day per person.
Bret, perhaps you haven't heard - but we have our own political crisis to deal with at the moment. And our most recent interventions in countries run by dictators haven't exactly gone as planned.
My personal rule of thumb is this: just say no to totalitarianism. It doesn't matter to me if it the totalitarianism is of the right or the left.
Dictatorship of the proletariat? Bad idea. Dictatorship of the oligarchs? Even worse idea.
That all said, looking back at our history over the past 7 decades, you can't help but wonder if our not-infrequent manipulations and interventions in Latin America, on behalf of ruthless corporations, didn't help put Chavez and Maduro in charge in Venezuela.
It sure seems to me that whenever a conservative administration was asked to choose between a ruthless form of capitalism and democracy, they inevitably opted for that exploitative style of capitalism (as documented by Stephen Kinzer in his various books, including "All the Shah's Men", "Overthrow", "The Brothers", etc.).
The situation in Venezuela is tragic - and I wish that there was something simple and elegant that we could do to help remedy it. But posturing by Mike Pence, while he remains in bed with Putin's stooge here in America, is hardly that thing.
In a better world, the United States would have mastered and exported a more humane form of capitalism, a form that deftly balanced profits and compassion. But ever since Reagan, we've gone in the other direction.
224
Venezuela is a false tragedy created by corrupt evil Conservative predatory capitalists who deliberately starve one of the wealthiest oil rich nations in the world. Stephens and other American Conservatives dignify the suffering of the majority of Venezuelans in their support of the greedy capitalists.
5
Long before Reagan. We've been intervening in the Americas for over 200 years (invaded Canada twice, starting in the 18th century; raped Mexico early 19th Century; raped Columbia [pried off Panama to build our canal]). The list is endless: Haiti[early 19th century], Guatemala [Eisenhower], Chile [Nixon] ... and on and on). And that's just in our own hemisphere.
1