Venezuela, la revolución como espectáculo: una crítica anarquista al gobierno bolivariano

by Rafael Leonardo Uzcátegui Montes

Venezuela, la revolución como espectáculo ofrece una investigación de 10 años sobre la política energética, la vida cotidiana y los movimientos sociales en este país latinoamericano bajo el gobierno del presidente Hugo Chávez y su proyecto denominado como «bolivariano».

Lejos tanto de las mitificaciones de izquierda como de las críticas liberales de los principales partidos políticos opositores, el texto ofrece una detallada y rigurosa sistematización de hechos y cifras que complejizan la maniquea visión que ha imperado sobre este país latinoamericano, registrando testimonios de diferentes luchas de base que sostienen que en el país con las reservas de petróleo más grandes de la región, y una cultura política caudillesca y populista, es poco lo que ha cambiado.

Este libro es una apasionante mezcla de análisis sociológico, periodismo y crónicas en primera persona, realizadas por un activista libertario que ha acompañado, desde adentro, a los principales movimientos sociales autónomos de su país, cuya argumentación influirá en lo que usted pensaba sobre Venezuela.

Genres: Nonfiction

304 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 2010

Reviews

[Joseph Spuckler · Rating 4 out of 5]

Venezuela: Revolution as Spectacle by Rafael Uzcátegui examines Venezuela's Chavez era from the inside. Uzcátegui is a libertarian which unlike the US term means anarchist or complete freedom. He is critical of supporters and critics of Chavez.

The problem with words is that definitions become slippery at times. Chavez was a fascist. Chavez was a socialist or communist. Chavez was a left-wing dictator. Uzcátegui calls him a populist which is as good of a definition or even better than the other terms. Dictators in the Cold War were either left wing or right wing depending on where their support came from. The governed in precisely the same fashion with left and right merely used as "team" identifiers. Jean Kirkpatrick stated the difference was that right-wing dictatorships were more easily converted to democracies. Populist governments have their place in history and in current governments. Tell the people what they want to hear. Deliver on some of it. Other items blame the other party or an enemy. This keeps the masses active in supporting the government. Jesse Helms probably did more to secure Castro's power by his hatred of the man and his government than cause any harm in Castro's popularity. Castro played Helms right back on to the Cuban people as a threat from the US.

Chavez used the same US threats to help secure his power and keep him in power. Uzcátegui examines indicators like murder rate, labor unions, militarism, and the new Consitution. Restrictions on education, labor, and political dissent were prohibited in the constitution but existed and/or expanded under it. Oil was still leased out to multinationals instead of being used to better the country. Changes in the country proved to be more restrictive than liberating. The left in the United States jumped on the Chavez bandwagon thinking this would be good socialism much like they did with Stalin in the 1930s. Examining the surface does not tell what is going on beneath the veneer.

This book does have a role outside of Venezuela as a study in populist movements. Most movements follow some form of nationalism and an enemy inside or outside of the state. Propaganda takes the place of news and generally is not challenged. Rousseau's General Will comes into play as an anti-democratic force. The government is popularly elected, and that government is the will of the people. If you disagree with the government or its leaders, you are a minority going against the majority. That makes you anti-(insert country name). If you are part of an opposition party that makes it almost treasonous. There are several times in US history where populism has risen and quickly disappeared. There are even arguments that the current administration is not conservative but populist. The ordinary worker against the elite (even though the one leading is not a worker, but a billionaire) is common refrain today -- the elites on the coasts vs. the workers in the heartland.

Uzcátegui through documenting the Chavez regime not only supplies a history but it also provides a blueprint of populist governments. This book was published in 2011 during the Chavez regime.  It is translated by Chaz Bufe who not only translates it from Spanish but also does additional editing to the text and source material. He claims just to consolidate and remove nonexistent websites and content. A fascinating history and explanation from the inside of Venezuela of the workings of populist regimes. 

[Mary L · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’ve never lived in Venezuela, but I have lived in Peru during a time of extensive immigration from Venezuela to Peru. Because of this, I met several Venezuelans in Peru. I remember seeing Venezuelans who had flown into Trujillo’s airport, which is actually located in Huanchaco, on the main road making the hour trek by foot into the outer limits of Trujillo, suitcases with all their remaining earthly possessions trailing behind them. The “best” job I saw a Venezuelan had in Peru was either street sandwich vendor or taxi driver; the most common jobs I saw Venezuelans having were asking for money on the bus or selling fruit/snacks at red lights—not exactly the picture of prosperity.

In the years since living in Peru, I’ve lived some years with my Peruvian grandpa. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard my grandpa listening to Peruvian propaganda blaming all of Peru’s problems on Venezuelan immigrants, which is complete bullshit. My experiences in Peru, my brushes with right-wing/nationalist/fascist Peruvian propaganda, and the United States’ recent kidnapping of Venezuelan leader Maduro, has left me with the overwhelming feeling that no one has the Venezuelan peoples’ backs.

Venezuela: Revolution as Spectacle extensively demonstrates how Chavez’s (the leader before Maduro) government uses the aesthetics of leftism without actually being leftist or socialist. As evidence, the authors cites Chavez’s willingness to collaborate with foreign capitalists to sell Venezuelan’s oil, his willingness to destroy the environment and disrespect indigenous land/rights over oil, his shrinking of workers’ rights, his silencing and censoring of media that disagrees with or criticizes his government, his use of police violence, and his framing of any criticism of his government as right-wing even when it’s coming from sources that are politically more leftist than him.

Overall, there’s valuable information in Venezuela: Revolution as Spectacle, but it’s still difficult to fully understand as an American without any previous political or historical knowledge of Venezuela.

[Adrián Sánchez · Rating 3 out of 5]

El libro ofrece una extensa recopilación de referencias bibliográficas y datos sobre la corrupción en el gobierno bolivariano de Hugo Chávez, lo que lo convierte en una valiosa fuente de consulta y referencia. Sin embargo, como ocurre con muchos autores de orientación anarquista de izquierdas, el autor comete el error de no reconocer que el problema también radica en la implementación de políticas de izquierda. Además, pasa por alto que los incentivos dentro de la política suelen llevar a los políticos a priorizar acciones que les permitan maximizar su tiempo en el poder, lo que implica satisfacer los intereses de diversos grupos, incluso aquellos con ideologías contradictorias (teoría de la elección pública). El autor intenta presentar estas contradicciones como algo ajeno al verdadero izquierdismo, llegando al punto de caracterizar a Chávez como un "neoliberal".

[Santiago Reyes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Es uno de los mejores trabajos que se han hecho sobre el proceso de la administración de Hugo Chavez. Lo mejor es que es desde adentro y tomando distancia de los bandos enfrentados.