@Violet Rose in The Rain
If you live in a country where the government can expropriate your land and steal your money, you live in a socialist country.
Venezuela is in terrible shape.
It’s been in terrible shape for a long time. It has been having these exact same crises for many decades.
In ‘99 Hugo Chavez was elected on the back of a left-populist movement, and enacted a series of reforms - nationalizations, welfare programs, etc. Lots of great social-democratic policies.
His rhetoric went even further; by what he said, he was building socialism. By what he did, he was building social democracy and (maybe) breaking out of Venezuela’s cycle of extreme corruption, military coups, and economic subservience to the US.
But meanwhile, Venezuela’s economy continued to be entirely fueled by oil sales. Chavez increased this dependency, as his predecessors had, and when global oil prices fell, the modern crisis started.
There is in economics a concept known as Dutch Disease. From Wikipedia:
In economics, the Dutch disease is the apparent causal relationship between the increase in the economic development of a specific sector (for example natural resources) and a decline in other sectors (like the manufacturing sector or agriculture). The putative mechanism is that as revenues increase in the growing sector (or inflows of foreign aid), the given nation’s currency becomes stronger (appreciates) compared to currencies of other nations (manifest in an exchange rate). This results in the nation’s other exports becoming more expensive for other countries to buy, and imports becoming cheaper, making those sectors less competitive. While it most often refers to natural resource discovery, it can also refer to “any development that results in a large inflow of foreign currency, including a sharp surge in natural resource prices, foreign assistance, and foreign direct investment”.[1]
Venezuela’s oil riches have led to the rest of the economy being highly underdeveloped. In 2014, the market price of oil absolutely plummeted, and with it took Venezuela.
The short version is this: Chavez and Maduro did not put Venezuela on a different economic path than where it had been for most of a century. It had always been hyperreliant on oil and thus prone to recession and inflation.
Socialism has nothing to do with it, and also Venezuela isn’t all that socialist.
Venezuela’s economy is 70% private, so it doesn’t have a socialist economy. What it does have is nationalized oil, which when the prices were high, were used to pay for social welfare programs. It’s worth being said that before the socialist party was elected and nationalized oil, the standards of living were much worse under the neoliberal government.
Upon the implementation of social democratic policy, conditions have improved, which is why Chavez especially, along with Maduro, are popular among Venezuelans. Venezuela is simply a capitalist country which started nationalizing oil/other industries in an effort to improve the citizens’ lives, resulting in wealthy corporations sabotaging their economy, the U.S. sanctioning them, and then finally when the oil crash of 2013 hit, their social welfare systems collapsed. With that collapse, the U.S. is giving explicit support for a coup in Venezuela and literally saying that the oil would make a great asset to U.S. businesses so they want to privatize it. It’s nothing short of imperialism, and media tends to push a heavy imperialist bias.
Noam Chomsky wrote an entire book called Manufacturing Consent outlining propaganda in the U.S. media about foreign policy, and how it almost unilaterally supports imperialism.