Hugo Chavez in Venezuela: My excitement and concerns

Being one of Rona's friends who has expressed some "mixed feelings" about the President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, I feel that I need to explain a bit because she has heard similar sentiments from numerous folks and apparently none of us has given much of an explanation or good cause for such feelings. I'm not going to try to go into the whole recent history in Venezuela. If you want to know more you should actually check out Rona's site as she has some good links.

Let me say up front that I am no expert on the recent history in Venezuela. Most of my information has come from reading NACLA (The North American Congress on Latin America, a great magazine on Latin America), and The Nation magazine. (I would link to NACLA articles, but they are only free for subscribers and my sub has run out.) I also fully understand that the criticisms of Chavez in Venezuela come from an elite class who have not a shred of credibility or decency; they are only concerned with maintaining their privilege in the country. And I understand that mainstream news coverage in the U.S. also lacks credibility for pretty much the same reason—a desire to maintain privilege—but on a global scale.

I will also say up front that whatever misgivings or concerns I have about Chavez' "revolution" doesn't change the fact that overall I am excited by what has happened in Venezuela and am much more supportive than critical of what he has accomplished.

I thoroughly enjoy his upfront criticisms and challenges to the U.S., particularly his open and friendly relationship with Cuba. But the realist in me wishes he would tone it down sometimes. There is no need to provoke the U.S. more than necessary, our country already has quite a tendency to invade Latin American countries that don't follow the "party line" as dictated by Washington D.C.

From what I have read about his social programs and land redistribution they sound great. They are really nothing all that radical, but of course are branded by the elite class as extreme and unfair. I'm not sure how anyone can criticize health care and literacy programs, but they always do.

Okay, so what misgivings do I actually have about Chavez?

The first is about the lack of a grassroots movement in his "Bolivarian Revolution" (as I think he calls it). I would like to know more about what is happening there, but overall it seems to me that this revolution has been quite top-down, as might be expected from a military officer. My concern is not so much about what Chavez is doing but more about the inherent lack of internal strength when there is no real movement behind the political changes. (This is similar to my main concern about Cuba as well, the inherent weakness of having one strong leader who never hands power over to others.)

I would like to know more about the "Bolivarian Circles," which are apparently some sort of neighborhood based organizations that form the base of Chavez' support. From what I have read they are mainly structures to support Chavez, but the idealist in me would love to hear that they are more than that, that they are organizations where people can develop leadership and power.

My second concern is about Chavez' lack of regard for democracy at times. This is a tough one, because I understand what he is up against. The wealthy opposition own all the media outlets and have enormous power in the country. (I actually don't have clear examples of some of his unilateral actions. I wish I could get at those NACLA articles.) Still, I believe that it is legitimate and important for us to push for Chavez' to be as democratic as possible.

Overall I would say that I am more excited by Lula da Silva in Brazil than by Chavez. Lula's programs may not be nearly as "radical" as those in Venezuela (actually, I think Brazil has a lot of similar programs, including support for some land redistribution) but he is in a much tougher situation. Chavez has the great luxury of having the enormous cash influx from oil sales, all he really has to do is alter a situation where all that wealth is controlled by a small ruling class—okay, okay, that's not actually that easy to do, as the elites in Venezuela have proven.

Still, Lula impresses me more for a number of reasons. The first is that he comes from a long-term, slowly built movement. The Workers Party has slowly built power (over the course of about 30 years, I think) and has built a strong infrastructure starting on the local and then state (province?) level. Second, he is making what progressive changes he can but also seems to me to be making the hard decisions that he needs to for Brazil to survive in an economic world controlled by the IMF, World Bank, etc. I'm sure he has plenty of critiques from the more radical wings of his party, but he knows that he can't afford for international investment to leave Brazil. Third, I believe that his work to build economic alliances between Latin American countries—and also with other "third world" countries—is incredibly important. I think that these alliances are what are really needed to change the balance of power in the global economy. His leadership of those countries in successfully challenging the U.S. at the WTO conference in Cancun, Mexico literally made me get choked up with pride.

So, my concerns about Chavez are not at all such that I am against him, I just want him to be better. I feel like of a lot of us who are anti-imperialist get excited by Chavez' rhetoric, but what is happening in Brazil—not just Lula, but the Landless Peoples' Movement, and the Workers Party—is actually more radical and more durable in the long term.