As I type this post in haste, at the end of a long day, I can’t help but think about the difference between life and death. Today, March 5, 2013, my little brother celebrated his seventeenth birthday in a quiet suburb of Boston, Massachusetts. His day included a birthday breakfast, school, homework and dinner with my mother, as my father is out of town for business and I am in Boulder, blogging about international political economy. Also today, some 3,000 miles south of Boulder, millions of Venezuelans mourned the death of President Hugo Chavez. After a long and rather secretive battle with cancer, Venezuelan Vice President Nicolas Maduro announced that the vehemently leftist Chavez had passed. Today was a day of celebration of the birth of my little brother, and no doubt a meaningful occasion for my family, but it was also a day for mourning for a man whose passing has serious impacts on the global economy.
Hugo Chavez was a leader in the Socialist movement in South America. According to a CNN article, he is quoted as saying:
"After many readings, debates, discussions, travels around the world, etcetera, I am convinced -- and I believe this conviction will be for the rest of my life -- that the path to a new, better and possible world is not capitalism. The path is socialism”. (1)
After being democratically elected into office 1999, Chavez, among many other leftist practices, began a process of centralizing the economy. He seized control of the countries oil reserves and industry, and used revenues to fuel an economic spike in growth that Venezuelans had not seen before. Forget about the repressive treatment of political opposition, the socialist redistribution of wealth in the country and the fact that Venezuela still has 30% of its population living below the poverty line. Chavez used much of the profits from the state controlled oil industry, profits that increased dramatically while under Chavez’s control, and used them towards social programs and investments for Venezuela’s poor. He was a popular figure among Venezuelans, seen as a sort of "Robin Hood". Chavez was also very well known for his very vocal opposition to the USA, and it’s economic and political power. He was good friends with none other Fidel Castro, and even received his cancer treatment from Cuban doctors… in Cuba!
Venezuela is not by any means a world power, and unfortunately for them, they aren’t seeing growth and development like those of the BRIC nations. But they are a regional power, and Chavez was arguably the most well known Latin American president after Fidel Castro. That’s due partly to his domestic favorability, and partly to his open and vocal opposition against American interests on the international stage. Venezuela also sits on the largest oil reserves on the planet, and supplies subsidized oil to regional governments with Leftist policies. Chavez also established close ties with anti-American governments around the world including Iran, Cuba and America’s most unstable “ally” Pakistan.
Life can be viewed as a cyclic process, where one life or cycle ends, so must another begin. This is true for the Venezuelan government and economy. The end of Chavez’s rule means the start of another. Will this new leader and regime continue a socialist, anti-American, nationalistic approach, or will he or she be more open to economic and political diplomacy? How will Chavez’s death effect Venezuela’s political and economic position in the world?
So I sit here, perplexed, as I contemplate life and death. Hugo Chavez is dead, and will leave behind a legacy of socialism, anti-Americanism and social revolution in Venezuela. My brother is healthy, athletic and taking each day as it comes, and God willing, he will celebrate many more birthdays throughout the years. But the political and economic reality he will face as a consumer and player in a global economy will be different than the one you and I have faced while Hugo Chavez was in office in Venezuela. As an oil producing country, and one within our own region of the world, Venezuela will continue to play a role in economic and political affairs in both the Western Hemisphere and around the globe. Our already rocky relationship with our Southern counterparts will face more interactions in the future, and it will be interesting to see it unfold before us.
It will be interesting to see who takes the lead in the country.Chavez worked very hard to to lead his country, and worked with the same conviction to stay in power. In 2009 he was able to remove the term limits for the presidency.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/15/AR2009021500136.html
The vice president will take control for the mourning period, but new elections will start soon, providing an opportunity to Venezuela to change course if they want to. Many have called Chavez a dictator, but he was democratically elected many elections over. Will someone be able to fill his shoes? Doubtful, but there is no doubt that the rest of the world will take notice. They have too much oil to ignore.
I think it's great that Chavez was able use socialism in ways that helped some of the most downtrodden people in Venezuela, and his distain for the US could certainly be seen as rational if one takes a Marxist perspective. However, things like the immense consolidation of executive power he undertook in addition to his friendliness toward autocratic governments in Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and others, should certainly be reasons that even Marxists don't look upon his legacy favorably.
ReplyDeleteThis is great! I love how not only does this relate to class, but you relate it to your life. It will be interesting to see what will happen next in Venezuela after the loss of a great leader. There will definitely be changes considering the country has had the same ruler for so long. I'm particularly interested in how the oil industry will change in Venezuela. Without Chavez, it is questionable how Venezuela’s oil will be extracted. If Capriles Radonski comes to power, what will he do?
ReplyDeleteAlthough Chavez rhetoric was very anti-American, I find it interesting that behind the scenes approximately 40% of all oil exports from Venezuela went to the United States. It will be interesting whether this will continue in the future since Chavez was seeking to increase exports to China right before he died. I agree with this post that it’s great that poverty levels have declined in Venezuela in the past decade of Chavez rule, but to what cost? Many multinational corporations have declined to invest in Venezuela due to the fact of his economic policies. Will the future leader of Venezuela be more open to FDI or will he continue the same economic policies of Chavez?
ReplyDeleteThis is something that I have been thinking of since the death of Chavez. While Chavez created many social programs to help the Venezuelans, there were obviously many issues and struggles with his presidency. I think, as others have mentioned, it will be interesting to see how and if the oil industry will be changed and if there will be more cooperation with the international community especially regarding economics.
ReplyDeleteSocial change does not always translate into economic or political change. With the elections in Venezuela over, and the Maduro in power, I presume that we will continue to see more of the same Socialist policies in the near future. I think Capriles ran an admirable race, he was the closest challenger to Chavez last election and almost pulled out a dramatic election upset. Also, I was not aware of "backroom" relations between the US and Venezuela, but it would not surprise me at all given American history in Latin America.
ReplyDeleteChavez's socialist policies helped improve inequalities in the country, specially for the poor in Venezuela. In the process however , he deeply undermined Venezuelan democracy, and he created a model of authoritarianism that other autocrats copied, thus harming democracy in many Latin American countries. In terms of economic growth, the country grew slower compared to Peru and Brazil during the time of Chavez was in power. This is counter intuitive considering Venezuela has such a large oil reserve and should have had large economic growth. This stagnation is largely tied to the fact that Chavez had high inflation and dried up investment during his rule.
ReplyDelete