Bombs were detonated at the
Bombs were detonated at the Colmbian and Spanish Embassies in Venezuela yesterday. No word on who's behind the attacks, but:
We know how Hugo Chavez treats Venezuelans who criticize him: He shoots them.Kind of an eerie coincidence, dontcha think? (Link via InstaPundit.)How does Chavez respond to criticism from abroad? Well, it looks as if we found out the other day.
On Monday, Columbia and Spain both issued strong statements critical of Chavez.
Early on Tuesday, large explosions occurred at both the Columbian and Spanish embassies in Venezuela.
It's interesting to study the kinds of people who become dictators. Some have wondered why we don't have that kind of person here in America -- but we do. We haven't seen crazy all-out thugs like Chavez or Hitler or Hussein or Stalin because our institution has held a relatively strong stance against any one individual seeking too much power. Our Founding Fathers recognized that you had to divide up the power in government -- because that division works as a check against the tyrant.
Dictators aren't an overnight phenomenon. It generally takes a few years for one to acquire enough power to do whatever he wants. He can't do it in one fell swoop, of course, because the people would rise up and stop the guy. You have to slowly accrue power, slowly turn up the heat. Chavez has been doing just that in Venezuela over the past year.
You could probably say that FDR had a similar agenda in America in 1933. It wasn't until he tried to go WAY over the top (adding six additional Supreme Court justices, appointed by him, of course) that people started to wonder if maybe he wasn't in it for the people, but himself. It's hard to make the case that FDR was a would-be tyrant, but still -- had he succeeded in some of his efforts, we might be a dictatorial socialist country today. Everything he did, he did in the name of "the people", and the people were willing to allow him the power because of the fear and uncertainty they felt about their own lives and futures. In a benevolent dictatorship, it's all about whether you trust the guy in power. There's no concern over what happens afterwards.
The problem is you can't get the power back after you grant it. Government doesn't like to give power back. (You ever wonder why Democrats so passionately fight against any tax cut -- and why the Republicans don't fight strongly enough for them?) That's why it's so important that our institution -- with all its checks and balances -- is preserved, in its original form. We have to have faith in how it works so that when we go through a rough patch (such as post-9/11), we don't end up ceding more power to the next potential dictator. Thus, we have to understand it and how it works; we have to understand the history behind it and the thought processes of those who created it.
That's why, as much as I like Bush and trust the man himself, I don't want to see an expansion of federal power under his watch. Because I know that a more powerful justice department today coule be used tomorrow for gathering more information on political enemies (remember the FBI files ordered by the Clinton white house?) or for throwing people in jail indefinitely because they might be labelled (falsely) as a terrorist. We have to be very careful about setting up secret courts to handle this kind of thing because they have a power over us that we would never, as individuals, grant to another individual. But ultimately, that's what we're doing, through the proxy of what we deem to be a generally benign government.
The point is, we've got to watch out for this sort of thing whenever it occurs, and we've got to keep taking back whatever power we can. And watch out especially when you hear them say that they're doing it for your own good.
But back to Chavez: yeah, that guy's insane. Of course, you'd have to be insane to blow up the embassy of a foreign power because you don't like what they have to say about you.
Posted by Matt at February 26, 2003 2:29 PM
