The Rise of Hugo Chavez Right Wing vs. Left Wing in Latin America

President Hugo Chavez, a strong Venezuelan leader was born on the July 28th, 1954 in Sabaneta, Venezuela. Chavez is known for his reforms as well as his strong opinions. Chavez had attended the military school where he graduated with a degree in military sciences and arts in 1975. Chavez continued to serve his nation as an officer in a paratrooper army unit. This essay shall be a prompt into the characteristic model of leadership exercised by him in his right wing versus the left wing in Latin America

Hugo Chavez rose into prominence first in 1992 following a failed coup. Speaking of the coup attempt, Chavez referred the attempt as an opportunity for sowing the seed of a popular insurgency against the false democracy. Chavez spent two years in jail but he later made the world marvel on his wining of the 1998 presidential election in Venezuela. Least to say, Chavezs victory was a shock to many particularly taking the fact that he had great opposition from the Washington, multinational corporations, oil companies and almost all media organizations in Venezuela (Vivanco, Wilkinson, 2008).

After his presidential triumph, he went further to declare a socialist revolution that caused havoc among the elites ruling the country including the middle classes. In spite of his great opposition, Chavezs programs of poverty eradication, land reforms and the wealth redistribution have nevertheless pleased the low class in Venezuela. Contrary on the other side, the powerful forces in Venezuela were largely angered particularly in the West. For instance, key actors in Washington in 2002 provided a backup to a coup by the right wing ruling elite.

The opposition arrangements temporarily finally saw president Chavez unseated. However, after a short time, he was rapidly ushered back into power following the taking into streets by thousands of his supporters. After taking to the streets, the Chavez supporters surrounded the presidential palace that had previously been commandeered by the plotters of the coup. The supporters than demanded the return of President Chavez into office. Restored into the presidential office full swing, Chavez went further to hold a referendum regarding his presidency and then reclaimed his presidential seat by a large majority of 5842. Chavez effectively won in the presidential run and silenced his critics (Wiarda, Mott, 17). He then strengthened his defeat of the principally white ruling elite.

Chavezs popularity among the people of Venezuela is not an issue to doubt about. He has dedicatedly used the oil wealth in Venezuela to establish numerous feeding stations all over the country. The penniless poor have now the hope to see another day due to free meals which are provided courtesy of Chavezs feeding programs. Thousands of Cuban dentists and doctors have been imported into Venezuela in an exchange program of Oil for Doctors. This group of doctors and dentists from Cuba has been spread all over the country to provide free healthcare and dental care.

Chavezs policies have realigned greatly the Latin America power axis, forging a close relationship between Cubas Fidel Castro and the people of Venezuela. He has also forged a strong relationship between the united forces and the left-wing governments on the continent in order to weaken what Chavez refers to the imperialists seize of the Latin America. Chavez effort of fostering the relationship with Cuba has been received with much criticism as well as international condemnation. For instance, while addressing the House of Commons, the British Prime Minister said, rather in ironical way, that he would love to see Cuba having a proper working democracy following its relationship with Chavez.

As problems of poverty and great economic downturn in Venezuela persist to bite, the people of Venezuela have no time for philosophical debates. President Chavez persistently seeks the right to maintain his power realm by ducking the constitutional elements which limit his term in the presidential office. As Chavez is determined of this, the European and United States media keeps an eye and keeps on wondering on the erosion of liberal democracy in Venezuela as well as the future of Bolivarian socialism. The immediate problems of rampant inflation, violent crimes and economic turmoil are the major concerns of the people of Venezuela (Reich, 5). Chavez aptly uses these problems as baits to winning support from the people of Venezuela.

After ten years of Chavez rule, the voters of Venezuela still complain of the deteriorating domestic security as kidnappers and robbers rub shoulders with the civilians daily. The national murder rates have increased significantly and since Chavez entered power, about 100,000 cases of murder have been reported and the cost of violent crimes keep eating into the economy of the people of Venezuela. It is interesting to note that with the biting recession and the economic liberalization coming under global attack, the people of Venezuela keep singing the song of anti-Washington invective. Chavez has shut down all radio stations in Venezuela to silence foes and the media and at the same time spreading aid and blessing to the guerillas of Colombias Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

The opposition of the right wing in Venezuela has attempted to portray Chavez as a dictator and a terrorist who is answerable to all the mess that has caught the country. As the conservative Uribe government, very much concerned with its increasing isolation amidst a growing left wing consensus in South America, latched onto the accusations that Chavez was involved in the funding of the FARC rebels. In the past years however, there has been a trend in the rise of the leftists and the populist leaders in the entire Latin America (Levitsky, 2008). An interesting question that seems to arise out of this is whether the current rise in leftist leaders can be considered populist in nature or a different case altogether.

It is essential to understand the concept of populism which is a political phenomenon that involves considerable mobilization by a single charismatic leader who mobilizes a mass of people against whole established elite. In history, figures like Peron in 1940s can serve as classic models of populism. Hugo Chavez represents the modern example of populism as he came in and threw the whole political elite that had extensively been established. People like Evo Morales and Peron can compare with the Venezuela president, Hugo Chavez since they overthrew the political elites of their time. This implies that center-left governments in the Latin America such as Brazil, Uruguay and Chile are not populists because they are socially democratic.

Explanations about the true origins of the populist movements in Venezuela have been sought. Others have linked the movements to the political oppression that happened in the last twenty years while others connecting the economic reasons to the movement. The truth of the matter is that the left wing is coming to Latin America due to democracy. Predominantly, Latin America has been democratic for the past two and half decades. In about 35-40 years ago, there used to be military coups rising against the left-wing governments. For instance, in Chile, the party that is in power was overthrown in 1973. Elsewhere, in Uruguay, the military gained power in part so as to fight the folks who are now in power in Uruguay.  In Argentina, the party that is presently in power was overthrown in 1976 and there is no single doubt that Lula of Brazil would have been overthrown if he were elected president in 1980s (Margolis, 2009). This means that it is the consolidation of democracy which allows the left wing to peacefully come into power in the Latin America and should not be interpreted as a response to repression.

Efforts to figure out the exact cause of the wave of election of the left wing government have been low. However, there are two major reasons which can be attributed to this phenomenon. Perhaps, the economic crisis which hit Latin America between the years 1998 and2002 have an explanation for these events. As of the 1990s, everyone in the Latin America had some economic policies which could be referred to as Washington Consensus. These policies were supporting the market and also the United States economic policies. The opposition was left in the 1990s in several countries since the governments whether left wing or right wing, all were behaving like right wing governments (Parenti, 11).

In the beginning of 1937, during the financial crisis in Asia, the Latin America dejected into one of the worst five-year periods ever. After this worst period, poverty mounted, unemployment peaked and economic growth maintained at zero level throughout Asia. In addition, crime rates were high and the only solution was to throw out the incumbent. The opposition side was in the left wing while the incumbents were in the right-of -centre. When the election was done, the incumbents lost in 1998 while the opposition triumphed with great number of votes.

The United States policy has much to explain the exact reason why the wave of election of the left wing government has maintained a low profile. During the 1990s, the United States was so much popular among the Latin America. Over time, this popularity has significantly changed due to a variety of reasons. One of the reasons being the perception of the united states neglecting the Latin America as well as its immigrations, trade interests and others (Wiarda, Mott, 52). The invasion of the Iraq by the United States also resulted to a significant reduction in popularity among the Latin America.

The current rise in the left wing leadership has created a reaction that it may lead to a politically or ideologically unified Latin America that may be potentially against the United States. However, this scenario will never happen because the interests of a nation always predominates the ideological or political interests. Talks have been held for a very long time particularly in the earliest populist period in Latin America of uniting the states and the mechanism to make the nations to work in a collective way.

In Venezuela, an important event still rolls, as Chavez with his mighty moving further towards the stand of socialism despite the heated rhetoric of anti-U.S. Chavez has great plans of nationalizing very large companies in Venezuela and rule by decree. It has been observed as a threat to the peace and stability of the united states of Chavezs anti-democratic moves. After being sworn in for his second term of six years, Chavez, the Venezuelan President, there were fiery pronouncements for which Chavez, the most controversial leader has become famous. For instance, he referred Jesus Christ to be the greatest socialist who ever lived in history and made a promise the change Venezuela into a socialist state and on another ceremony, Chavez made a shout mentioning that he swore that death would result if the fatherland socialism would not prevail (Parenti, 16).

The active Chavez, after a few days made an announcement plan to nationalize all the companies in the electricity and telecommunication industries. He then called for the greater government regulation over media and the natural gas projects. This shows how strong the leadership under Chavez is and the principles which he believes in cannot be shaken. According to Chavez, it is only death which will shake the foundations of socialism.

For a number of years, Chavez has been known all over the world for his socialist and anti-American bluster although no action has been taken with majority of his actions only being mentioned instead of actions being initiated. In another occasion, Chavez hit headlines when he called President Bush the devil during the United Nations meeting. Chavez can be remembered by letting the private companies go about their business without any regulation. However, of most controversy is his plan to nationalize major industries that happen to be controlled by companies owned by Americans. The step to nationalize the American companies tends to send a signal of the Chavezs intention to adhere to the promise of socialism. Reacting to this decision by Chavez, a majority of Venezuelans maintain that president Chavez should be taken seriously in whatever he says (Levitsky, 2008). Chavez has a vision of the 21st century socialism and therefore regarded as a leader with reflections.

Since Chavez re-election, his policies have sharply turned to the left wing. In the custom of several Latin American strongmen prior to him, he tends to be accumulation his power and making a move to suppress every form of opposition including the refusal to renew the TV station renewal license which has criticized him. This shift which Chavez names it as a new era has created alarm among the officials of the United States including other neighbors of Venezuela. It may be estimated that about 28 percent of all the Latin Americans have a positive image of Chavez. Chavez does not score so badly since even president Bush had a rating of 30 percent popularity among the Latin American.

The legacy and administration of Chavez is a complicated one he is an extra ordinary political figure who has achieved a lot for Venezuela. In his achieving, both negative and positive values can be put on him. It is known that the Venezuelans oil reserve is one of the largest worldwide. President Chavez, in spite of the many controversies he is identified with, has used the profits from the oils to feed the poorest of the nation of Venezuela. The president has improved the general infrastructure, health, education, literacy as well as other social maladies which the people suffered from them (Wiarda, Mott, 112). Under the guidance of Chavez, Venezuela has finally emerged as a leader in Latin America for the people who do not necessarily have a feeling the united sates is ever a the best model to follow ever.

The concern of Chavez for the poor living conditions in Venezuela is genuine. To present, a majority of the lower socioeconomic classes have supported the government of Chavez with unwavering support. For instance, in the wake of 2009, the people of Venezuela approved the referendum which was meant to abolish the term limits on elected officials purposely allowing Chaves to run indefinitely. 

There are groups of people who have a great opposition both from the upper class and the middle class Venezuelans. Chavez is blamed of nationalizing some of the industries and lands which have been behind the many trials to oust him. There have been unknown fears Chavez could be developing a government of dictatorship although it is not wrong to observe this. In deed, Chavez has a streak of dictatorship in him (Vivanco, Wilkinson, 2008). Critics argue that Chavez temporarily suspended Congress more than once while his referendum victory in 2009 essentially allowed him to be the president sol long as the people elect him.

The elections at Venezuela are rarely squaky-clean with Chavez having full power to control the results of the elections. This implies that even if the election is done and the voters select a different candidate, Chavez will be there to decide on the fate. Chavez has often been cracking into the press and suppressing the media leading to increasing the restrictions and punishments for slander. Chavez has not spared the court structures he drove through major changes in how the Supreme Court should be structured. This allowed him to stack the Supreme Court with loyalists.

The relationship between Chavez and the United States is not a healthy one the United States has widely reviled Chavez for his commitment to deal with such nations which the United States considers to be rogue like Iran. Chavezs hatred for the government of the United States seems to approach the paranoid. Chavez has accused the government of United States as being behind all sorts of plots planned to assassinate or remove him from power. This perceived hatred has driven Chavez to pursue a counterproductive strategy like supporting the Columbia rebels who can act to protect (Margolis, 2009). In addition, Chavez has gone a step further to denounce Israel and at the same time spending huge sums of money on the Russian-built aircrafts and weapons.

Generally, the efforts of Chavez to transform the nation of Venezuela into a socialist state has been perceived as a major setback for the policies  of the united states government of promoting open markets and democracy across the Latin America. Unfortunately, the United States remains with very thin options as Chavez stands firm to protest all the plans by the United States to introduce its policies in the Latin America. Chavez maintains that he cannot afford to sit back and get convinced by the United States on such policies he is prepared to protest against such proposals. What Chavez should maintain is the left wing which encourages socialism the rise of the right wing should mean that Chavez is trying to slowly giving in to such policies crafted by the West.

0 comments:

Post a Comment