Caracas, December 3, 2007 – Venezuela’s National Electoral Council Announced at 1:15am that the No vote against the President’s constitutional reform proposal lost 49.3% to 50.7%, with 45% abstention. Chavez conceded that the reform proposal lost “for now.”
The vote was divided into two blocks, whereby the first block included Chavez’s 33 proposed article changes and the second block included changes proposed by the national assembly. The second block lost with a slightly higher margin, with 51.0% for “No” to 49.0% for “Yes”.
Such is democracy and that is the point while reported as a the last chance to save Venezuela from a gerbillion years of Chavez commufascist rule! It was a referendum on constitutional changes, not an election not a coup (ahem, looking at no one in particular Florida & Ohio). An open public vote and he accepts he lost it (looking at no one in particular, ahem, Bush) and while I reckon he would have won the vote if there hadn’t been generously backed right wing opposition this shows a dynamic and messy democratic process at work so it would be nice to see some less biased coverage internationally. Chavez is doing something new and different, he may be overly strident which allows for caricatures, but ask any left wing Latin American leader of the past -oh you can’t, they have all been killed in US backed coups- America wants to control its ‘backyard’ and a country wanting to stand on its own sovereign soil and makes its own decisions is constantly under threat. While Chavez is demonised by conservative capitalists & their corporate media shills (including this hilariously deranged op-ed by Donald Rumsfeld -who apparently won’t be held accountable for war crimes because Sarko leaned on the judiciary and they invented an immunity for heads of state/officials. See? Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot would have been absolved by that precedent! Woohoo!) he gave his people what they routinely deny countries under the torture regimes they back, a vote (looking at no one in particular, ahem, Pakistan).
3 December, 2007 at 9:51 pm
Couldn’t agree more. I guess you have already seen it, but did you note the coverage on the BBC’s website?
http://maskofanarchy.blogspot.com/2007/12/venezuela-and-referendum-bbc-just-not.html
Bloody leftie media mouthpiece.
3 December, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Good catch of the hackery, the grauniad in particular should be ashamed of pushing the 2050 bullshit. The BBC just seem to have taken an editorial position of deference to the US on this, post Hutton gunshy rubes. For fucks sake Bush took power in a coup & has pursued a unitary executive, when does he get called a dictator? When did he hold a referendum on domestic spying or torture???? Not even a democratic despot! Maybe there is also race in this, Chavez is indigenous, I wonder how much is colonial distaste for ‘uppity natives’. Both here, the US and Spain.
4 December, 2007 at 3:48 am
I think most of the pundits are getting it wrong in analyzing the vote, at least in part. I think many poor Venezuelans got their first share of power under Chavez and were loath to give it up, even to him. Good for them.
I don’t live in that country, but I probably would have voted for Chavez when he was on the ballot and against the amendments this time out. I probably would vote for a pro-Chavez party in the next election too.
I also think that some of the amendments actually made sense. If Chavez were to promote separate votes on the ones having to do with property definitions and banking issues, he would probably win some.
My point is that swing voters probably had more complex views on the subject than the media acknowledge, focusing on the rabid anti-Chavez opposition which didn’t have enough people to defeat the plebiscite, even with the relatively low voter turnout.
5 December, 2007 at 4:41 am
Yes, you are spot on, many have made the same analysis, it was more complex than yes or no many issues required their own vote, not to be lumped together. Worth a perusal-
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/john_pilger/2007/12/keep_the_record_straight.html