Elections in Venezuela Do Not Offer Reason for Optimism

Although Western countries have long been more or less functioning democracies, this is not the case everywhere. The world’s first socialist state, the Soviet Union, did collapse under its own impossibility back in 1991, but that doesn’t mean socialism lacks support in today’s world.

An example of this unfortunate fact was seen over the weekend in Venezuela, where the socialist party received as much as 83 percent of the vote in Sunday’s parliamentary — or National Assembly — elections. In addition, a group close to the socialists gained another six percent.

The Venezuelan opposition gathered only 5.17 percent of the votes. This was influenced by the fact that many opposition leaders had urged their supporters to boycott the elections, claiming that President Nicolás Maduro had fraudulently won last year’s presidential election. This view is also shared by the international community.

It remains to be seen what Venezuela’s socialists will do with their electoral victory. However, their use of power so far does not offer much reason for optimism.

According to Wikipedia: "During the 21st century, under the leadership of socialist populist Hugo Chávez and his successor Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan economy has collapsed, prompting millions of citizens to flee Venezuela. GDP has fallen by 80 percent in less than a decade. The economy is characterized by corruption, food shortages, unemployment, mismanagement of the oil sector, and since 2014, hyperinflation. As of 2024, inflation has stabilized at 59.61%."

This can be compared to the time before the socialists came to power. Back then, Venezuela's economy was growing strongly, and for example, GDP per capita rose by as much as 400 percent between 2003 and 2010 — in just seven years. A similar development can hardly be expected based on the election results we’ve just seen.

Of course, Venezuela is just one of many countries that still believe in socialism, but in practice, it is a fairly representative example of its kind. And that is why it’s worth wondering why socialism still enjoys so much support around the world — not only in developing countries but also in prosperous Western nations like Finland.

Admittedly, here the socialists don’t want to call their economic thinking socialism. Instead, they "only" aim to raise taxes and transfer as many of society’s functions as possible under the responsibility of the public sector — in other words, to implement socialism without naming it for what it is.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Marx in the Classroom: How Ideological Education Shaped Careers and Values
Does China prove the superiority of market economy?
Lessons from Venezuela

Highlights of the BRICS Meeting in Kazan, Russia

BRICS is an intergovernmental organization comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates. It is a geopolitical bloc, with governments meeting annually at formal summits to coordinate multilateral policies.

This year's meeting in Kazan, Russia, has brought up some interesting developments, which I would like to present to you, my esteemed reader.

The Portuguese UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, attended a summit hosted by Vladimir Putin, a man who did not participate in the previous BRICS meeting to avoid being arrested under an international arrest warrant. I wonder whether the UN Secretary-General is unaware of the political implications of this or if he knowingly chooses to support the Russian dictator.

In any case, I do not believe his visit enhances the respect for the UN among people in Western countries. However, I am certain his popularity will rise in some other parts of the world.

President Vladimir Putin presented a symbolic BRICS currency proposal. However, the head of Russia's Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina, was not in favor of the idea.

I can’t help but wonder how long it will take before Nabiullina's body is found under a window somewhere in Russia. That seems to be the fate of Russians who disagree with Mr. Putin.

Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro declared that “Venezuela is part of this BRICS family. We apply the principles of BRICS with historical conviction. The time has come for a balanced world, which is multipolar and multicentric. BRICS can count on Venezuela and on the full revolutionary strength of our historical project.”

Given the collapse of the Venezuelan currency - the Bolivar - it is clear that anything would be an improvement in terms of stability. On the other hand, Venezuela's inclusion could have a highly negative effect on any new currency. It will be interesting to see if, for example, China would be willing to join a currency shared with Venezuela.

Finally, it is worth noting a prime example of a kind of transparent dishonesty heard at the meeting. It was said by Putin, who, without batting an eye and without acknowledging his own guilt, rambled on that "unfortunately, there are many armed conflicts on our planet, including at Russia's borders. It is truly unfortunate that there is this armed conflict in Ukraine."

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Resisting Putin’s Foolish Dreams
Does China prove the superiority of market economy?
Lessons from Venezuela

Does China prove the superiority of market economy?

The economy and standard of living in China was ruined by the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution ordered by the Chairman Mao in 1960´s. After the death of the Chairman, the economic direction was changed in China towards the current system, where communistic dictatorship is combined with a market economy. 

That has led to great progress in the most populous country of the world. And now the statistics tell the Gross National Income of China is soon going to reach a level of $12 000 per capita. 

That means Chinese people are reaching the level of citizens of Costa Rica or Venezuela and has already passed over e.g. Russians, Malaysians, Bulgarians or Turkish. And even the standard of living in countries like Chile, Uruguay or Hungary will be reached in the next ten years - provided that the growth rate of China corresponds to the development of the last twenty years.

At the same time, China has become the second biggest economy in the world - and the difference to USA is narrowing quickly. The difference in GDI per capita between the two is, however, about sixfold - and therefore it very clear that the difference in the welfare of the two biggest economies of the world will be huge for decades. 

Taken the facts above, it is very clear that even a communistic rule may produce economic welfare despite the horrific examples provided by the Soviet Union or - more recently - Venezuela. The key to that is, however, to give up on the economic principles of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels - and definitely avoiding Leninism as a means to apply their ideas. 

Instead it might be worth noting that the example provided by Xi Jinpin´s China seems to prove the superiority of market economy over socialism. And it drives me to consider, if more strict market economy should be preferred over the milder versions of socialism - such as Nordic social democracy? 

After all, considering other aspects usually thought to advance economy are excellent in the Nordic countries. The freedom of speech is among the best in the world, democracy is challenged in no ways and people are highly educated. Despite those facts, their economies have become more or less stagnated (Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway) during the last decade or so, according to GNI.

For me, these notions will be of extreme interest in the becoming years. And therefore I intend to follow future developments in the Chinese economy - and make conclusions about the contributions of market economy and social democracy by comparing future developments in China and the Nordic countries. 

Previous thought on the same topic:
The main consequence of Putin´s attack to Ukraine
Once upon a time in China and Taiwan
Could China take advantage on the weakness of Putin´s Russia?

Lessons from Venezuela

Venezuela is extremely rich in its natural resources, but now in chaos. The reason is the same that led to the collapse of Soviet Union and its empire few decades ago. That is: the contradiction between the human nature and planned economy - which leads to economic inefficiency, corruption and oppression of human rights.

Right now it is not known what will happen in the ongoing revolution in Venezuela. Its justification can, however, be evaluated from the list of countries, which have shown their support to parties.

The socialistic dictator Maduro has been supported by Mexico, Bolivia, China, Turkey and Russia, whereas the leader of revolution, Juan Guaidó, has been supported by the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Canada, Colombia, Panama, Paraguay and Peru.

However, something can be inferred about Venezuelans themselves, as even the leader of the revolution is slightly leftist. It shows to me, that Venezuelans have not understood the reason for their poor situation. I mean, the problem is not the current dictator, his personality or his greed of power. Instead, the problem is the basic nature of socialism, which is only implemented by Maduro - and if did not exist, someone else would do it.

But of course, the Venezuelans have a right to decide on their own future. We others can only understand the reasons for the problems in Venezuela, and vote according to this understanding in elections of our own countries.

This is especially important now, when the world is going towards a period of slower economic growth. And the outcome of a leftist government would be rugged also for us in Finland.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Wishes to hell by novelist Itkonen
Why a journalist was unaware on the number of Stalin´s victims?

The original thought in Finnish:

Mitä jokaisen suomalaisen pitäisi oppia Venezuelasta?