We Venezuelans are not living in a democracy like the Swiss, the Americans or the Costa Ricans. We are not living under a Marxist State like in Cuba.

We are not under a fundamentalist regime like in Iran. We are living in a classic fascist State such as Mussolini's Italy or Peron's Argentina. Most or all of the components of a fascist State are present in our country today. Let us take a look:

A militaristic regime. The military has the control of most key ministries, State agencies and State companies. They also control most of the national money through those military and social programs which are not monitored by normal institutional channels. The military are Chávez's friends and co-conspirators: Cabello, Chacon, Izarra, Garcia-Carneiro, Prieto, mostly from the middle ranks, none particularly experienced in the management of national resources. The group behaves in an arbitrary, militaristic manner, bypassing all normal controls, in an atmosphere of almost total impunity.

A xenophobic, pseudo nationalistic regime. Chávez's speeches contain numerous references to foreign oppressors and to the local traitors and oligarchs who serve as their spokespersons. He called the Venezuelan petroleum managers he dismissed "imperialistic lackeys." He claims to identify with popular attitudes but what he really does is to promote the least positive of those attitudes: overdependence, vulgarity and machismo. He confuses these attitudes with popular values, which they are not.

The State as the supreme entity. Mussolini saw the State as the keystone of the fascist doctrine. The will and the interests of the State prevailed over the individual. Equally subordinate to the concept of the State was the nation. In a similar fashion Chávez considers the State as the main entity. He identifies the State with the government and, of course, he is "the" government, he is the leader.

He recently exclaimed: "I am the only leader of this revolution." Peron wrote: "I found a country off its course, in the hands of foreigners. . . . I made the problem of the country my problem and I solved it by deciding on the revolution . . . this was my destiny." For Mussolini the masses were� "like wax in my hands," not real people but tools to obtain power. In Venezuela the State reigns supreme: a new State telecommunications company is opening up, a State airline is being created, food distribution is passing on to the hands of the State, TV stations and newspapers owned by the State are appearing all over the country. Behind these moves there is need for State control, promoted by a fascist leader.

A pompous sense of Manifest Destiny. Under Franco coins had the inscription: "Francisco Franco, caudillo of Spain by the grace of God." Eva Peron, in her autobiography (My Mission in Life , Vantage Press, NY, 1957) spoke of Peron's rise to power as a second coming of Christ. She wrote: "Peron is a gigantic condor that flies high, near to God." More to the north, where condors do not fly, Chávez more modestly compares himself to an eagle. He adds, however, that he flies so high that he does not waste time in catching flies. He says that he is only a "feather in the wind, blown by the irresistible force of the revolution" and that he is ready to die for the revolution. Peron also was ready to die for his revolution but he did not.

Elitism. Huntington defines fascism as a system in which there is a belief in the natural superiority of a chosen group and in the inherent genius of a leader. A prominent Venezuelan intellectual, now repentant, said that Chávez was never wrong, was infallible like the Pope. One of the members of this chosen group, Diosdado Cabello, stood in the platform addressing the mob by singing: "Chávez drives them crazy . . . Chávez drives them crazy." These beliefs are enthusiastically disseminated by dozens of adulators who surround the "chosen" ones like flies around a pot of honey. Through this elitist attitude the Chávez regime has become one of the most exclusive systems in modern Venezuelan political history. Half the population is actually excluded from participation on national financial, social and political decisions which affect them.

A dream of a Continental revolution. Both Mussolini and Peron tried to extend their "revolutions" beyond national borders and both eventually failed. Chávez is dedicating much time and money, that could be much better employed in trying to solve the Venezuelan social tragedy, to promote a continental revolution. This revolution has no ideological core, except perhaps a common ground of resentment against the US. Chávez has aligned himself with the FARC (Colombian guerrillas), the coca growers of Bolivia, the "piqueteros" of Argentina, some anarchic groups in Ecuador and, of course, with the Marxist dictator of Cuba, Fidel Castro.

The problem with his continental vision is that it has brought together some of the most undesirable social elements of the hemisphere, an alluvial fan of the socially resentful.

The verbal fight against corruption. All fascist regimes pretend to have a deeply moral root. Peron preached the moral regeneration of the masses. Chávez won the presidency due to his promise to stamp out corruption. However, his regime is probably the most corrupt of all Venezuelan governments of the last 100 years. Approximately USD $150 billion have been stolen, pilfered, wasted during his five years in power. Today the country is highly indebted, the national infrastructure is rotting away, ministries reproduce themselves like Australian rabbits and the country is full of beggars and abandoned street children.

Doctrine. No respectable fascist regime can afford to lack a doctrine. State supremacy was the ideological basis for Mussolini's regime. Peron advocated "national" greatness, perhaps to compensate for the deep seated national complex of inferiority that lies at the heart of most "revolutions." Peron spoke of "new men" and a "new fatherland." Chávez has cooked up something called "the tree of the three roots." The three roots are Bolivar, Simon Rodriguez and Ezequiel Zamora. From Bolivar he has stolen the name, to baptize his mockery of a revolution. From Rodriguez he has taken the "need for new men" and his insistence on inventing things continuously (he invents things every Sunday). From Zamora he has adopted the hate for the rich and for the white. He has added a few drops of John Kenneth Galbraith, Leo Durocher (nice guys finish last) and a dash of voodoo that he feels will make him invulnerable to physical harm.

In The Soldier and the State, Huntington summarizes fascism as follows:

* Glorifies struggle
* Hails the State as the ultimate source of morality
* Romanticizes war and violence
* Worships power as an end in itself
* Emphasizes the supreme power of the leader
* Advocates a dynamic, aggressive, revolutionary policy to promote conflict
* Believes in the total subordination of social institutions to the State

This was written long before Chávez made his appearance in political life. But Huntington could have thinking of him, don't you think?