Customer Reviews

Hugo Chavez: The Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

The events of this weekend in Mar Del Plata, Argentina have again shown that Hugo Chavez is a man to be reckoned with on the world stage. Adored by many, vilified by others, he has arrived on the scene of Venezuelan politics in a manner that has raised the ire of many in the world, especially the yellow regime that currently holds the reigns of power in Washington, D.C. Readers who are curious about Chavez will get a fairly detailed overview of his life in this book. The author is clearly biased towards Chavez, but given the nature of the western press these days, one can view this bias as a kind of historical countervailing power, an alternative to the diluted treatment of Venezuelan history that one is often confronted with. The author has spent much time in Venezuela, and has interviewed Chavez personally, and so readers can gain at least some confidence that the author knows what he is talking about.

It is readily apparent when reading the book that the author feels that the policies and politics of Hugo Chavez should be understood in the context of the life and works of Simon Bolivar, the popular revolutionary of the early nineteenth century who was attempting to liberate some areas of South America from Spanish rule. The `Bolivarian revolution', as it is now called, is one in which Chavez definitely wants to be identified with, and one that involves uniting the peoples of Latin America in order to counter the "imperial power of the north." A community of nations and states will form this alliance, with priority given to the three areas that surround Venezuela, namely the Caribbean, the Amazon, and the Andes. This would also involve creating a military alliance, which Chavez viewed as a kind of `Latin American Nato' (but not including the United States).

The author describes in great detail the coup attempt on February 4, 1992 that was instigated and carried out by Chavez with the assistance of five army units. The coup was doomed from the start, for the government of President Carlos Andres Perez had found out about it a day earlier. Certainly a daring move by Chavez, and one that sheds considerable light on his personality, which is described by the author as extroverted, confrontational, and argumentative. Chavez apparently wanted to overthrow the Venezuelan government as far back as 1982, at which time he began organizing a group called the Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement. This group, called a "study circle" by the author, was supposed to be based on the teachings and philosophy of Ezequiel Zamora, Simon Bolivar, and Simon Rodriguez. Even with its emphasis on social and political philosophy, it is still difficult to view Chavez and other members of the Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement as being intellectuals. If they were, they were certainly of the Sartrian type, and believed that thoughts must be translated into action.

One organization that is often mentioned in the western press these days is the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC), which is usually characterized as a Marxist guerilla army, financed by drug money, and that is participating in the current civil war in Columbia. The author characterizes FARC as being an organization that is sympathetic with the Bolivarian views of Chavez, and that Chavez feels the same towards FARC, since Chavez wants to re-create the "Gran Columbia" of Bolivar: an alliance of Venezuela, Colombia, and Ecuador. FARC has become apparently become a formidable force in Columbia, and its support by the Chavez government has antagonized the Columbian government. FARC is now considered to be a "terrorist organization" by the government of Alvaro Uribe Velez, which receives heavy support from the U.S. government (quoted as $3.9 billion dollars by the author). The author writes of the U.S. support of the attack against FARC in 1964 by the Columbian army, but does not give detailed evidence for this.

And what of current U.S. involvement in the affairs of Venezuela? The author discusses in fair detail this involvement, but not as much as needed to make objective assessments as to the intentions of the U.S. government. The US does have access to the airports in the Dutch Antilles, which is offshore from Venezuela, and made requests (the author describes this as "putting pressure") on the Chavez government to allow flights over Venezuela as part of their "war on drugs" against Columbia. Chavez did not permit these flights, resulting in further antagonism between him and the US. As far as the coup attempt in 2002 against the Chavez government, the author cites a CIA intelligence brief as evidence that the US had prior knowledge of it. The author further claims that the coup leaders had the explicit consent from the US (the leaders having visited Washington several times), but he does not cite the detailed evidence for these claims. Apparently Miguel Angel Cortes, the Spanish minister for Ibero-American cooperation, revealed that as many as six phone calls were made to Otto Reich at the US State Department (who is a former US ambassador to Caracas), and that Reich was definitely supporting the coup plotters. The author also claims that the bishops of the Catholic Church in Venezuela were involved in the planning of the coup, but he does not cite evidence for this claim either. The author though gives the minute details of the coup as it unfolded, and how Chavez managed to regain control of the Venezuelan government.

The reading of this book, the viewing of the political speeches of Chavez, and the perusal of the many blogs discussing Venezuelan politics certainly sheds light on the politics and ethical standards of Chavez. Even if one agrees with his political opinions, or even with his stand against the yellow regime of Washington DC, it must be remembered that he at one time did not hesitate to initiate the use of force. Extreme skepticism must therefore be applied to Chavez, as it must to every other living politician.

"Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution" by veteran journalist Richard Gott introduces us to the important struggle against neoliberalism being waged by the people of Venezuela and its charismatic leader, Hugo Chavez. This underreported story is told with skill, verve and clarity by Gott, whose first-hand reporting and intelligent historical analysis have combined to produce an engaging and fascinating book that should appeal to a wide audience.

We learn that Chavez' roots in the Venezuelan countryside and his family's support of populist causes helped to shape his core values, including the belief that military power might be used to secure social and economic justice. Gott describes how the neoliberal policies of the 1980s and early 1990s first led to social unrest and then emboldened Chavez, whose first coup attempt while serving in the Venezuelan armed forces in 1992 proved to be unsuccessful. However, the phrase "por ahora" (for now) that Chavez uttered at his arrest thrust Chavez into the spotlight and captured the public's imagination. Eventually, the ongoing and widespread disgust with Venezuela's notoriously incompetent and corrupt government helped Chavez easily win election to the Presidency in 1998.

At first glance, Chavez' Bolivarian Revolution resembles nothing more than a strong social/democratic state, wherein revenues from the national oil company allows the government to shower benefits onto its citizens. However, the Chavez administration's recognition of indigenous and minority rights and its substantive economic reforms belies a much more progressive agenda when compared with, say, the so-called social welfare governments of North America and Europe. Domestically, Chavez is seeking to improve the standard of living through an uniquely empowered form of citizenship; internationally, Chavez wants to create a political and military consortium that is dedicated to protecting the people and resources of South America from continuing exploitation by multinational corporations.

Gott also compares and contrasts Chavez with his political ally Fidel Castro in order to differentiate the Venezuelan revolutionary experience with Cuba's. Whereas Castro had looked to the independence-minded Jose Marti for inspiration, Chavez draws upon Simon Bolivar to imagine an united South America. Interestingly, the Chavez/Castro relationship appears to be mutually reinforcing, so that while socialistic Cuba is striving to become more democratic, democratic Venezuela is working to become more socialistic.

The analysis presented by Gott helps us understand that Chavez' challenge to U.S. hegemony in the hemisphere is very real, and in fact the election in December, 2005 of a socialist government in Bolivia suggests that the political dynamics may well have been permanently altered. Little wonder, then, why small-minded reactionaries such as Pat Robertson have no response to the Bolivarian Revolution than to call for its most outspoken leader's assassination. But if you are interested in getting the real story and in forming your own opinions, you are encouraged to read this timely and enlightening book. Highly recommended!

I'm of two minds on this book. On one hand, Gott is clearly an admirer of Chavez and he is a supporter of Chavismo, which colors his analysis. On the other hand, even for those who aren't favorably disposed to Chavez, the book is useful and interesting.

Gott buys into the rhetoric of Chavismo without question. The U.S. is routinely described as an "Empire" that wants to "rule the world" (p. 13). It is okay to fault U.S. policy but there is little evidence it seeks to rule the world. He also buys into phony populist arguments such the assertion that foreign debt was "forced" on developing countries by international banks (p. 51). On the same page he admits Venezuela "rashly borrowed", well, was the Venezuelan government complicit in the debt run-up or not? You get the sense Gott knows better but just can't resist spouting knee-jerk populist rhetoric. He also exaggerates the U.S. role in the 2002 coup attempt, as Chavez also does. A CIA analysis is cited on page 223, but what it contains could have been gleemed from reading the Venezuelan press in the period before the coup. The U.S. certainly welcomed the coup but the evidence of active involvement is pretty thin.

The book is interesting for the background it gives. The information on Chavez's formative years is useful in its own right. He is candid when he describes how some leftists have had falling outs with Chavez. Gott also explains why the opposition misjudged their support (and opposition to Chavez) by relying on polling data that didn't accurately sample the lower classes where support for Chavez is strongest.

For people interested in Venezuela and Chavismo, it is a worthwhile read but don't expect much objectivity.

Gott's it is definitely not an unbiased and balance account, but it is one that would help you get the other view (although a tainted one some times). The book's alleged factual information is not accurate and its narrations are simplistic many times. The book lacks research and depth. For example a key event like the Coup de etat of April 11, 2002, has a very simplistic linear argument with a lot of controversial interpretations of the events, just read "Venezuela's 2002 Coup Revisited: The Evidence Two Years On By Francisco Toro" (you can Google it on the web). The later does allow the reader to realize how complex were the events that date and how much is still not clear. The Book editorial work was also lax, for example Heinz Dieterich Steffan is introduced as an Argentinean journalist, when he is German sociologist professor at the UAM in Mexico. This sort of mistakes undermines the book's credibility. However, the authors close encounters with Chavez are interesting enough to make the book an amenable read.
Not withstanding, Gott does have insight on the region and is not as partisan as to be blind. Many of the criticisms he makes about the region are in many respects accurate and he has been following the region for many years. He has also shown he can do better research and more balance accounts of the events as he does in his Cuba: A New History; were at its end he writes a compelling portrait of the unjust and difficult conditions for Castro Cuba's opposition primordial organizations.

Gott is a veteran leftist British journalist, a Latin American specialist, who writes in a very clear and not ungraceful journalese style which I must say is very refreshing to read after just finishing a semester trying to read through dreadfully dull authors in grad school classes. The read is relatively quick.

Perhaps the biggest point in the book is the insight provided about the opposition to Chavez, the people the American media portray as great heroes for democracy struggling against Chavez. This opposition almost exclusively comes from the remnants of the old discredited elites that had run the country into the ground before Chavez's election. After the overthrow of the military dictator General Marcos Perez Jimenez in 1958, the so-called Social Democratic party, Democratic Action(Spanish acronym AD) and the Christian Democrats (COPEI) agreed to set up a political system where they would share the spoils of the bureaucracy and effectively prevent any third parties from running for president.
Carlos Andres Perez of AD was president of Venezuela during its economic high point, 1974-79. Venezuela nationalized foreign oil companies in 1976 but according to Gott the state run oil company was run as the fiefdom of its directors and its employees who seemed to have been a privileged class among Venezuelan workers. The vast majority of Venezuelans received very little from the abundant petrodollars of the 70's; a lot of the money was invested abroad or redistributed to the managers and employees of the company.. The government spent massively on infrastructure projects and used oil money to place grassroots supporters on the government payroll. The downward spiral of oil prices in the 1980's sent the economy into collapse by 1989. Andres Perez had previously denounced the International Monetary Fund as a genocidal tool against the poor of the third world but he reversed himself in early 1989 and started adopting the policies of that organization. He launched plans to privatize government owned industries, eliminate tariffs to protect small farmers, fire numerous public sector employees, and privatize the state-owned oil company. A hike in bus fares sent the residents of the shanty towns on the hills overlooking central Caracas down the hills to loot and riot. The military responded by moving into poor neighborhoods and often murdering anything that moved. Thousands were killed. This terrible riot/massacre was named the "Caracazo" in popular lingo. It scared to death Venzuela's largely white elite, this terrifying spontaneous uprising of Venezuela's largely dark-skinned poor.

In the years following the Caracazo, the shantytowns in the big cities grew with new members from the country side and the elite kept getting richer and the poor poorer. Nationalist inclined military officers and civilians led by Chavez launched a coup in February 1992 against Perez. The coup failed but, Gott writes, Venezuela's elite was terrified: for one the masses of people appeared to be not unsympathetic to the coup. Gott quotes an interesting speech in Venezuela's congress after the corup by Rafael Caldera of COPEI who had been Venezuela's president from 1969-74 and was to be elected again in December 1994. Caldera seemed to almost endorse the coup: he stated that it was understandable that the masses of people would not rally to the government's defense in this coup attempt because the political system was run by corrupt elites and the masses were becoming more and more impoverished. Caldera, continued the privatization program, with the help of some leftists in his cabinet, Gott writes, such as Teodoro Petkoff, the founder of the party, Movement to Socialism. In 1993, Andres Perez was impeached for corruption and placed under house arrest.

COPEI and AD were so discredited, according to Gott, that otherwise reasonably popular presidential candidates in 1998, such as COPEI's Irene Saez, saw their support in pre-election polls plummet to as low as two percent, when they decided to launch their presidential runs with the backing of COPEI or AD.

Gott points out that Chavez, whatever the shortcomings he may have, is opposed by Venezuela's largely white elites because he has encouraged the country's poor, its marginalized black and brown people, to enter the political process. The Americans since 2001 have opposed him for pretty much the same reasons. The country's main labor confederation, the CTV, has mainly served as a subservient arm of the AD, and never has contained more than 12 percent of the workforce, usually the more elite workers. Chavez has inspired organizing efforts amongst the majority unskilled and informal sector workers, which scared CTV leader Carlos Ortega to such an extent that he collaborated in the April 2002 coup attempt. The protestors against Chavez are made up for the most part, of the country's small upper and middle classes.

It seems that of all the measures which led the elite to conspire to launch the April 2002 coup attempt was Chavez's rollback of plans to sell off Venezuela's oil concerns to foreign companies. Such measures were part of 49 decrees Chavez launched in November 2001, which included a very small land reform. These were extremely mild Social Democratic gestures, but the elite media increased their vulgar screams about impending communist dictatorship to fever pitch. The basic concentration of wealth in the hands of the wealthy few was only being slightly affected but Venezuela's elites were quaking in their boots. Under the coordination of the business federation Fedecameras, the elite launched a coup with U.S. backing in April 2002 and an attempt to sabotage the oil industry in December 2002-January 2003.

In Gott's last section he gives an overview of the "Missions," different organizations in local areas, funded by profits from the state oil companies that provide to the masses literacy training, cheap food, health care, etc. .....to a large extent the book is interesting and nuanced and not afraid to portray some things discreditable to Chavez though I think his coverage of the incident with the Pemon Indians is inadquate, especially in covering Chavez's response to it.

A very well written book that reviews the life and achievements of one of the most controversial leaders of our time. Hugo Chavez is a remarkable revolutionist who the world is paying. This book reveals why the world needs to pay attention to the extraordinary Venezuelan leader.

Forty years ago, many radicals happily jumped onto Fidel Castro's bandwagon, captivated by the Cuban leader's anti-imperialist rhetoric and specter of a new kind of world socialism. Today, Hugo Chavez has taken over this role, with his speeches (rightly) comparing George W. Bush to the devil at a time when no one else will speak truth to power. It is this phenomenon which makes Richard Gott's biography so crucial.

Most newspaper accounts of Chavez obscure who he really is by painting him in such broad strokes that we are forced to take sides less on what we know about Chavez then what we know about his critics (such as the United States). This book clarifies much about Venezuelan history and the present situation.

Gott defends Chavez from his right-wing detractors by pointing out that since 1998 Chavez has been supported repeatedly by voters in Venezuela. And yet the author is not hopelessly mesmerized by Chavez. His sympathetic narrative mixes historical perspective, analysis and personal experience across three decades...but mostly goes without the uncritical eye lent Chavez by so many English-speaking radicals.

The history of the Venezuela left--both military and civilian--is extraordinarily important to understanding how Hugo Chavez launched the Bolivarian revolution over the heads of the established parties, supported by the enthusiasm of the masses. It also begs the question of the future of socialism in Latin America.

The narrative ends in early 2005, in the midst of the Bolivarian revolution, which has since tacked even further left. In 1998, Chavez advocated for a social-democratic "third way" between capitalism and communism. Today, he champions "Venezuelan socialism", going as far as declaring "I am a Trotskyist" in reference to the anti-Stalinist Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky.

After viewing the spat between Chavez and Spain's King Juan Carlos on TV last week, where the latter told Chavez to "Shut the f....k up!" with the former replying in the same coin, there can be no doubt who this young revolutionary army leader's, now President (what for his 3rd term?) hero and role model is: the old dying Leftist Caudillo himself, Fidel Castro. Richard Gott's book on 'Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela', Verso, 2005, that he has unleashed locally, and regionally - by alliances with Evo Morales in Bolivia and now with Ecuador, shifts Gott's focus from Cuba to the Latin American continent. He painstakingly and meticulously uncovers the layers of skin (that of a `mixed-blood' mestizo, with an Afro-American heritage) that is the epidermis of this charismatic young leader, so reminiscent of Abdul Gammal Nasser and the `Young Turks' in Iraq and the Middle East of the 1950s, and the officers' movement that overthrew the aging Portuguese dictatorship in 1974. The parallels are clear and Gott does well to remind us of both their potentialities and limitations, their unstable social bases, their populist appeals and their shifting day-to-day politics. Who is the real Hugo Chavez and when will he emerge? This seems to be the question many still ask. Gott traces the attempted coup against him in 2002 and its aftermath, not a blood-bath as the Right feared but an unusual 'negotiated settlement'. Chavez's moves between many political registers but has yet to anchor his Bolivarian Movement in a party that can represent his ideas for change. Or does he not need one? Gott has done his usual well-polished job here and we await with anticipation the outcomes of the titanic test of strength between Chavez's Bolivarians and their powerful rivals, local and abroad. He is still reliant on the huge oil-sales to the US for revenue and his revolutionary rhetoric seems only to have ruffled the feathers of those in power in the White House, whoever that may be after the coming election. What will happen when Fidel joins Che et al in the great revolutionaries graveyard in the sky- will he take over their mantle? A topical book and a topical leader. Well, recommended as there is no other of its type available really

In 1973 Augusta Pinochet assumed control of Chile in a bloody military coup. Twenty five years later Hugo Chavez won the presidential election in Venezuela. One leader had support from the American right and the other the left. The right should be embarrassed by the assistance given to the ruthless Pinochet. My question was whether or not Chavez is deserving of respect on the left. Make no mistake; the author is not simply an unbiased observer. The back of the book states that "Gott is, if nothing else, a true believer of the revolutionary process in Latin America". He refers to Globalization as "the disease of the new millennium ". The author frequently mentions Chavez's warm relationship with Fidel Castro but absolves Castro of the crushing poverty and repression in Cuba by blaming it on American embargoes. Twice the author mentions that Chavez honored Mao Tse-Tung on a trip to China without commenting on the fact that Chairman Mao was one of histories great villains.

Chavez is clearly a brave man and definitely a visionary. What I wanted to know was whether or not he is a wise leader. In many ways his leadership developed as a response to neo-liberalism and U.S. meddling in South America. The despicable General Pinochet is the perfect example of how the U.S. has sometimes brought misery to our southern neighbors. His coup was orchestrated by Nixon, Kissinger and the CIA. Even the 2002 coup attempt in Venezuela had the blessings of the U.S. government under George W. Bush despite Chevez's high approval ratings. So much for Democracy. Likewise the IMF and World Bank have caused significant pain to the poor with their economic `adjustments'.

The problem that Chavez may have is his desire to issue a top-down solutions to Venezuela's problem. Nationalizing the oil industry is a reasonable response to the plundering of the countries national resources by multinational governments but Hugo is also attempting to relocate hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan's and restructure their diet from wheat to rice and maize. This kind of top-down management and relocation may remind some of Mao or Stalin but Chavez at least holds the distinction of having been democratically elected and despite the assertions of his opponents seems to respect the institution of democracy.

I wish Hugo Chavez success. The world needs people who follow their own path and stand up to the status quo. As long as he does right by his people and respects their will I'll support his attempts. Unfortunately, Latin American leaders who stand up to the west tend to have short reigns. I wish the author had spent more time talking about the effects of Chavez's policy and less on the history of revolution in Latin America. About the only thing written about policy results was, "he has already got the economy of Venezuela moving again in a manner beneficial to the bulk of its impoverished population". That really doesn't say much. I can't really say that I know much more about Chavez's skill as a leader than I did when I started. I have to give this book a mediocre rating because it just didn't give me the answers I was looking for.

Don't believe Pat Robertson and CNN! Far from being a dictator, the democratically elected socialist president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, is the Salvador Allende of my generation. From the nationalization of Venezuela's oil reserves to his literacy campaigns and healthcare projects for the poor, Chavez is leading a peaceful revolution, improving the lives of millions of women, campesinos, indigenous people, Afro-Venezuelans, young people, elders and the working-class. Not to mention his opposition to the FTAA and his refusal to send anymore Venezuelan soldiers to train at the SOA. Despite a violent U.S. orchestrated coup attempt in 2002 and persistant attacks from the reactionary Venezuelan oligarchy, the Chavista movement continues to thrive. With Morales in Bolivia, Chavez in Venezuela, the Zapatista rebellion in Chiapas and the piquetero movement in Argentina providing innovative, grassroots,democratic examples of political organizing, a new, glorious dawn is breaking in Latin America. Viva Chavez!