That's a really stupid question

Not long ago, the regime that Hugo Chávez founded was an object of fascination for progressives worldwide, attracting its share of another-world-is-possible solidarity activists. Today, as the country sinks deeper into the Western Hemisphere’s most intractable political and economic crisis, the time has come to ask some hard questions about how this regime — so obviously thuggish in hindsight — could have conned so many international observers for so long.
Because lots of 'international observers'(and media weenies, and general socialist idiots) wanted to believe, and called anyone pointing out problems names and ignored them.  And made excuses for every slip downward.  And now keep blaming the US for it, because that's far more palatable than blaming Chavez and socialism.

Get this wording:
When Caracas elected an opposition mayor, his powers were stripped out from under him, and he was eventually jailed. When voters mischievously gave the opposition a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly, a newly packed Supreme Tribunal took to overturning its acts. The government’s faith in democracy lasted exactly as long as its majority.
Emphasis mine.  It wasn't 'mischievous', you idiots, THEY WANTED TO CHANGE THINGS.  Jeez.
And the Chavez government's only 'faith in democracy' was in using it to seize power.

"However did this happen?"  Same way it's happened in other places: idiots who really wanted socialism to work helping another country fall down the stairs.