Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Yesterday, Hugo Chávez, President of Venezuela, die at 4:26pm. He was not an ordinary person. His influence around Latin American and challenges to the U.S. gave a new concept of a regional leader in Latin America. "Still, Dr. Antolinez called Mr. Chávez a historical figure with the stature of Simón Bolívar, the South American independence hero, or even Joan of Arc". However, this is the half of the story. Mr. Chávez was also a chameleon, taking on and shedding policies and programs as they suited him. Those are some of the examples:

  1. He was a self-described Socialist who expropriated private businesses and property but looked the other way as opportunists enriched themselves off government contracts.
  2. He preached about economic independence and created chains of subsidized grocery stores but neglected agriculture and relied heavily on imported food.
  3. He excoriated capitalists and lectured about service to the country but tolerated or ignored widespread corruption.
  4. He condemned the United States at every turn but depended on it to buy the oil that made his movement possible.

His death plunged Venezuela into political uncertainty not only in political aspects, but also in the economy area. I urge you to beyond the boundaries and analyze that case through this article. Which are  the implications of Chávez's death in Venezuela, Latin America, and the World?

4 comments:

  1. Chavez's death led me to reflect on Venezuela's economy, so I took a look at both Venezuela and Mexico's GDP per capita since 1990. Both started at about the same place, but today the average Mexican is about 1,000 dollars richer than the average Venezuelan. Given that Venezuela has been blessed with abundant oil reserves and that Mexico has hardly consistently been a shining a beacon of stability and good policy, that's a pretty damning inditement of Venezuelan policy lately.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I love your passion on this topic. It is very insightful and you are on point with all your points. Number 4 is a very interesting claim by saying dependence - because I think he had the US in his pocket as far as he had oil. All that could be done was stay out of his way. Now the issue is how much hold the government will have in the economy now that Chavez is gone. Its the uncertainty that going to affect the country the most and the "revolution" in general.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think point 2 is particularly interesting. This goes to show the importance of exporting more goods than you import. This is a problem in the US right now (and has been for a long time). I think our reliance on imports is one of the reasons why our economy continues to struggle. This is even reflected in the (Imp-Exp) portion of the GDP equation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Number 4 is very interesting."With a defiant anti-imperialist discourse, he led a group of nations, including Cuba, Nicaragua, Ecuador and Bolivia, with leftist governments dedicated to diminishing American influence." It will be interesting to see how the rest of the nations react without the support of Chavez. Their voice is weakened and Chavez death has left a big hold in their movement.

    ReplyDelete