Published in The Washington Times November 25, 2007
  
It is hard to conceive of the willingness of a people who, having escaped the yoke of tyranny to embrace democracy, would allow their government to revert to suppressing individual rights. But, in a disturbing 21st century trend, we are witnessing this evolution in places like Venezuela and Russia. What so desensitizes people to democracy"s freedoms that they do nothing to prevent a return to tyranny"s chains?
 
Key to dismantling the engine driving democracy is a charismatic, egotistical leader, with a "bad" attitude. Almost 75 years ago, the world bore witness to the rise of one such leader in Germany — Adolf Hitler. Having suffered a humiliating World War I defeat, Germany lacked nationalist pride. Hearing Hitler"s impassioned promises to restore the country to greatness, but failing to hear voices questioning the cost for achieving it, the German people — in a display of euphoric nationalism — voted Hitler into power. It was power the tyrant then used as a vehicle to dismantle the engine of democracy that propelled him there.
 
In Russia today, such a leader similarly longs for the glory of a bygone era. Vladimir Putin calls the collapse of the Soviet Union one of the greatest disasters of the 20th century — this said about a country which, under the tutelage of Josef Stalin, killed 20 million of its own citizens. The Russian nationalist spirit rears its ugly head now, driven by Mr. Putin"s dream of Moscow"s return to greatness as a major player on the international stage.
 
Envisioning this dream, the Russian people are blinded to the nightmare that their democracy already is being dismantled as Mr. Putin throttles back on individual freedoms. News agencies are now government-controlled. Regional governors are no longer democratically elected but appointed by Mr. Putin. Many murders of critics voicing concern over the dismantling process remain unsolved. (Interestingly, while prohibiting the death penalty, Moscow imposes it for its critics.)
 
In Venezuela, we see similar leadership by Hugo Chavez as he dismantles his country"s engine of democracy and eliminates criticism for doing so. He does this by creating the false perception of an outside threat as a rallying point to stir up the public"s nationalistic spirit. (Mr. Putin does this too, citing America"s presence in former Warsaw Pact states.) The false threat Mr. Chavez created is of a future invasion by the United States. In a barrage of verbal attacks, he accuses the U.S. of pressing regional influence and, ludicrously, using subliminal messaging to do so. He buys Russian arms to defend against an invasion that will never come. Ironically, he allies himself with Islamic extremists who, absent a U.S. presence in the world, would be directing their violence against the likes of Mr. Chavez as a nonbeliever in Islam. These extremists see such an alliance only as a short-term necessity to achieve their long-term goal of world domination. Mr. Chavez fails to comprehend their long-term threat to Venezuela.
 
Meanwhile, like Mr. Putin, Mr. Chavez takes more power from his people — and for himself.
 
Both Mr. Chavez and Mr. Putin have used their authority in office to pave the way for their long-term presence, contrary to the constitutional restrictions under which they took power. Mr. Chavez has been more direct — manipulating constitutional change allowing him to serve multiple terms as president. Mr. Putin, recognizing such an effort would generate closer scrutiny and criticism by the international community, uses a different approach. Rather than seek change, he simply selects a malleable replacement he knows he can later use as a vehicle for a return to power.
 
Another factor at play in both countries is their immense oil resources. The high price of oil fills national treasuries with windfall profits — funds then used as various incentives to "buy" public silence. Meeting people"s short-term needs distracts them from criticizing their government"s dubious long-term goals. (Mr. Chavez, for example, paid Venezuelan workers a "Christmas" bonus, at the same time as the presidential election.)
 
But, whether the elixir is nationalism, financial incentive or both, the euphoria created is intoxicating, deadening people"s sensitivities to the fact they are embarked upon an orchestrated march toward an Orwellian society. They are lemmings who, when the march ends and they gaze into the abyss below, will only have themselves to blame for having done nothing to stop it.
 
In 1981, the author worked with others seeking to help an 18-year-old Soviet defector of the Afghan war adjust to life in the United States. Unable to so adjust, he chose to return to the Soviet Union — where he later was executed. Sadly, for him, the ability to exercise the many freedoms bestowed by a democracy proved too much to handle. He had come from an environment where life"s decisions had been made for him and simply found himself unready for democracy.
 
Witnessing the complacency of the Venezuelan and Russian people in failing to act against the ongoing dismantling of their own democracies, one wonders if they, too, simply are just not ready.