In contemporary Venezuelan politics, vitriol spills more than petroleum. Yesterday, Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez dismissed calls for holding a pre-election debate with his presidential opponent, former state governor Henrique Capriles, exclaiming that he would be “ashamed to measure himself against such a non-entity.” Meanwhile, Mr. Chávez’s detractors hope for the cancer-striken president “to die soon” and/or “rot in hell forever.”

The polarization is so emotionally charged that Venezuelan media rarely report the facts—only pronouncements. That is why a policy debate is so vital for the country to re-embrace the democratic covenant and honor the judgement of the people. Are conditions for the majority of Venezuelans better or worse under the current regime? Certainly the poor and political loyalists have benefited with free medical care, free housing, and even government gifts of household appliances. One is reminded of the free toaster once promoted by U.S. banks to new customers who opened a checking account.

But as for the economy overall, it’s hard to tell—due to discontinuance of government statistics and a lack of objectivity by the analysts. Whether he wins or loses on October 7th, one observer predicts, “it will take a long time to dismantle the social political structure that Chávez has put in place during his time in government and this will create a lot of social tensions.”

The same kind of polarization over President Chávez exists outside Venezuela. It’s a shame that many people can’t seem to have a rational conversation about post-Punto Fijo developments in Venezuela’s democracy. The Pact of Punto Fijo in 1958 conceived the longest lasting multiparty democracy in Latin America, but it established a system of representation that excluded women, indigenous peoples and the poor.

I always had a sense of reservation whether—in defying puntofijoism—President Chávez could create a more inclusive and consolidated democracy in Venezuela. Opinions may differ on whether he has succeeded on that score. But the same old cronyism persists that has plagued Venezuela going back to the days of dictatorship pre-1958. I know “red shirts” who have become millionaires flaunting couture clothing under Chávez. Overt corruption brought down President Carlos Andrés Pérez (who was also a gifted orator). Curious that it has not brought down Mr. Chávez.

As always, I welcome all comments!

Jason Berman

Likewise, after decades without a functioning postal service, Venezuelans embraced social networks such as Facebook and LinkedIn like a spreading wildfire. So I tend to view the current debate in the U.S. over the proposed downsizing of the postal service with a sense of irony.

Although I was present during the privatization of Venezuela’s Ipostel, I am not a subject matter expert on the USPS. So I decided to draw on my past experience in operational readiness testing and usability analysis to write a test script for the USPS. For those unfamiliar with operational readiness testing, my job was to envision the worst case scenario and see what happens when run through the processes as documented and the front lines are trained.

So here is the test script I came up with. Don’t laugh. First I mailed a letter from myself to myself. Then I marked it “Return to Sender.” Dutifully, the letter arrived at my address both times, as directed. Thus, the USPS passed the readiness test, but failed the usability test. They did what the customer requested, even though it made no sense.

USPS workers generally come across as the most patriotic people you could ever meet. They come from a very long line of tradition in service to their country–just not in a pushy, obnoxious way. Moreover, waiting in line on April 15th in the post office is a shared cultural experience that defines an aspect of the American way of life: we tend to procrastinate about certain things, even when it makes no economic sense to do so.

I also praise the USPS for making international parcel shipping accessible to the citizenry. Without a steep discount offered to corporate customers, a one pound package to Spain via FedEx or UPS costs about $150 vs. the $45 charged by the USPS. So yes, go ahead and close a few post office locations for the sake of efficiency: I am more than willing to drive an extra five miles to save $105. A gift package in the mail still beats a “happy birthday” online post in Facebook.

As always, I welcome all comments!

Jason Berman

 
I have a tip that is too good to sell. I have to give it away for free.

Does your organization have a small budget for Corporate Social Responsibility? No problem. A small investment can save a community. One billion citizens of the world have no clean water. The tragically common problem: many lack access to a drinking well.

Digging a well may seem like a small investment. Small, but not unimportant. I have made a small investment in the future. I have made a small investment in life. Please join me in supporting thewaterproject.org with a small campaign of your own. It can be promoted on Facebook, Google+, Orkut, Mixi and Twitter.

The Small Project. It starts small. By the way, snowballs start small.

Throw a snowball. It’s fun.

As always, I welcome all comments.

Jason Berman

 
I love globalism. I love that I can learn Chinese for free and have customers in China. I love that our planet’s communications infrastructure can reach anywhere because it is Standardized. But it’s the small things—ones that add up to personal style—that most touch my heart. I love that Alaskans make phone booths of ice. I love that I can have customers send me their photos of Iguaçu Falls with a rainbow connecting Brazil to Argentina. I love very strong coffee that I can make from Guatemalan beans. I love my Australian male accented Garmin nüvi GPS. What a great co-pilot he is! Let’s face it, globalism is to style what exponents are to numbers.

As we know from biology, difference is a prerequisite for evolution. We must be fruitful and diversify. Explore every corner. Think sustainably. That is why I identify as a citizen of Planet Earth. Our species has a common mission. We have pursued it intently for some 35,000 years, since the time of the first cave paintings. Humanity’s primary purpose is to create difference—to sprawl with our creativity. And to share with others. So when I discover an icon of earthliness I am grateful to share with my fellow Earthies.

Why, one may ask, do I help create Standards if diversity is so vital? First, they make leapfrogging easier for less industrialized societies. Second, they bring the entire world to our doorstep. I champion strategies to deliver difference, and Standards serve as a Rosetta Stone. They allow us to wire up, stand up and speak up. Standards for linking up technologies empower us all, and technology transfer is a wonderful calling for diversity professionals like myself. Instead of teaching a village to fish—I can teach it to teleconference with solar power and wireless. They already know how to fish.

As always, I welcome all comments.

Jason Berman