Latin America
Related: About this forumChavismo On The Horns Of A Dilemma: Populism And Pragmatism In Venezuela
Chavismo On The Horns Of A Dilemma: Populism And Pragmatism In Venezuela
by Steve Ellner
The Chavistas' difficulties are not about personalities but concern the challenges that face any democratic socialist government.
First published: 19 May, 2015
Leftists in Venezuela put forward a number of different explanations for the pressing economic difficulties and growing discontent that beset the nation and increase the possibility of an opposition takeover of the National Assembly in this years elections. High on list of explanations is an unfavourable comparison between the charisma and political acumen of Hugo Chávez and the inferior leadership qualities of his successor, President Nicolás Maduro. (This same line of reasoning is often presented by members of the opposition, who implicitly or explicitly attribute Maduros deficiencies to his working class origins and background.) A second explanation is that corrupt government officials are responsible for the nations current economic bind, which includes acute shortages of basic goods and the onset of triple-digit inflation.
However, a rigorous analysis of the governments current predicament must go beyond such personal factors, not least because the roots of the crisis date back to the outset of Chávezs rule and not simply to policies implemented by Maduro since he assumed office in 2013. An examination of the fundamental underlying problems going back to Chávezs election in 1998 can shed light on the low-intensity challenges and complex dynamics that any successful democratic socialist government will inevitably face. Sixteen years of Chavista rule separates the Venezuelan case from that of other socialist governments over the last hundred years, be they undemocratic regimes (the Soviet Union, Cuba, etc.), those that made concessions to the establishment in order to avoid the sharp polarization that characterizes Venezuela (e.g. the post-1945 British Labour Party), and those too short-lived to have been subject to the complex predicaments facing Venezuela (e.g. Chile under Allende). An analysis that goes beyond personalities is also essential to counter the demoralization stemming from the simplistic, if not fallacious, conclusion that the current Chavista leaders have sold out a pessimism aggravated by the prospect of major setbacks facing the Chavistas in the near future.
The starting point in understanding the Chavistas current dilemma is an appreciation of the intensity of the oppositions destabilization campaign, which has included legal, semi-legal, and illegal activity, and the permanent refusal of the anti-Chavistas to recognize the legitimacy of the government. For over three months in the early part of last year, Venezuela was subject to a campaign of violence and disruption known as the guarimba. Since then ample evidence has demonstrated that the business sector is at least partly responsible for the shortages stemming from hoarding and contraband. Needless to say, all leftist governments face recalcitrant conservative oppositions. But two factors distinguish the situation in Venezuela. In the first place, over an extended period of time opposition-induced disruptions with dire economic side effects in a democratic setting have had a wearying effect on the enthusiasm of government supporters. In the second place, and unlike during periods of open violence and civil war, pressure builds and it becomes increasingly incumbent upon the government to demonstrate that it is capable of guaranteeing economic production and stability, even though the economy remains in private hands. In the face of these weighty and ongoing challenges, the Chavista government has been caught on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, it has tended to opt for populist policies to avert the onset of fatigue and apathy among its supporters, while at the same time it has chosen to pursue pragmatic policies and alliances with often unreliable partners in order to maintain economic stability. Once both sets of policies are in place, it then becomes difficult for the government to switch paths in favour of more rational and practical approaches.
Chávezs pragmatism was in evidence from very early on when he allied his government with a small group of businesspeople who refused to go along with the two-month general strike in 2002-2003 spearheaded by the main business organization, FEDECAMARAS, for which the dissidents reaped handsome political rewards. The episode marked the origins of an emerging bourgeoisie which received preferential treatment from the government, but which included opportunists whose sole motivation was self-enrichment. (The alliance was not unconditional, however, as Chávez ended up jailing some members of this group for several years as a result of a major banking crisis in 2009.)
More:
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/chavismo_on_the_horns_of_a_dilemma_populism_and_pragmatism_in_venezuela
delrem
(9,688 posts)To be sure, the neo-con/neo-lib contingent is working overtime to put an end to the Venezuelan "experiment with socialism".
Oh wow, anyone who expects a socialist to win in a US federal election has to be dreaming.
hack89
(39,171 posts)not if the government is unwilling to take any responsibility for their decisions. If the only answer is "destabilization" then the future is bleak as the government divides the citizens into "good" and "bad". Good things never happen when governments declare war on a segment of their own population.
delrem
(9,688 posts)You "declared war" in 1999 and haven't stopped the slagging for one moment, since.
so how bad do you think the collapse will be? Will Maduro risk fair elections or will he fill up the jails with "destabilizers".
delrem
(9,688 posts)I think I'm going to faint from the stress it causes little ol' me.
hack89
(39,171 posts)but you know that.
delrem
(9,688 posts)heheh.
hack89
(39,171 posts)watching the Chavistas twist themselves into knots to support government repression is going to be fun. Because we know there is no such thing as a leftist dictatorship.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Your neo-con talking points are so out to lunch.
hack89
(39,171 posts)but you know they will never relinquish power. How can they when the only alternative is not socialist? They will continue to lock up opposition leaders to ensure there is no one to oppose them. You will watch it happen and you will support it.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Don 't pretend different.
hack89
(39,171 posts)they are not there yet. The next election will be the tipping point.
delrem
(9,688 posts)BYE!
Zorro
(15,749 posts)So he can now dictate whatever law he likes without the approval of the Venezuelan congress.
Sounds like a dictator to me.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Nuance like "parliament granted president elect Nicolas Maduro power to..." wouldn't be coarse tuned enough for a neo-con sensibility.
Zorro
(15,749 posts)"Parliament granted president elect Nicolas Maduro power to...dictate and enact laws without their approval."
There, finished it for you.
Judi Lynn
(160,601 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 2, 2015, 04:53 AM - Edit history (1)
Like the same powers employed by previous Venezuelan Presidents, and other Latin American Presidents throughout the Americas? That kind of power?
Zorro
(15,749 posts)When did Congress grant him unilateral authority to dictate and enact laws without its approval?
Are you sure you're on the right web site?
Zorro
(15,749 posts)That kind of power. You'd be OK with that?
Bacchus4.0
(6,837 posts)they are not laws.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)where all other economic sectors look so relatively unattractive they lose investment and even collapse
Fernando Coronil says that Venezuela's struggled to reconcile oil money with development since the 40s, and that's created not just rampaging corruption but lethal political crises (even with a lot of populists in the army, unlike say Guatemala or Argentina): Coronil notes that Chavez brought an entirely new sort of economics and politics (which the exhausted old Accion Democratica had relinquished) which the "guarimbas" are trying to bring back (where d'ya think the money for those giant sunglasses and tiny purses comes from?): for decades Caracas's central issue is getting the oil money back to Venezuelans, rather than numbered Genevois accounts, and that's been behind its numerous political crises
this is also Mexico's dilemma, since the mid-70s when all the PRI's promises came due at once (also it's bad for the country if oil prices drop OR rise. sigh ...); AD can be PRI and COPEI can be a somewhat senile PAN!
Bacchus4.0
(6,837 posts)Yet the non oil sector continues to shrink. Venezuela has some different affiction than Dutch disease. I think in the 70s oil boom it was the Dutch disease model