Hello! I'm an historian at New York University, where I teach courses on modern Latin America, social movements, and democracy. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have about Venezuelan politics, past and present, which is the subject of my new book "Barrio Rising" from the University of California Press (http://amzn.to/1J4ryeW).
If you've heard about Venezuela of late, you probably know it's a country mired in turmoil, "whether it’s political battles between supporters and opponents of the late socialist President Hugo Chávez, economic crisis as oil prices plummet, or social unrest as people fill the streets to protest everything from spiraling crime to state violence," as I wrote for the UC Press blog recently. "But thirty years ago the story was very different. Back then Venezuela stood for many as an inclusive democracy in a continent where dictatorship and civil war reigned. Enlightened leaders, strong parties, powerful unions – all spoke of a stable political system that for decades managed to ensure social peace.
Or so it seemed.
As I describe in Barrio Rising, the conflicts that grip Venezuela today aren’t a departure from but a continuation of decades-long struggles over what kind of democracy would take shape after the country’s last military dictatorship fell in 1958. More representative? More participatory? How to combine the two?
These struggles played out dramatically in the 23 de enero (January 23rd) neighborhood, a massive complex of barrios (squatter settlements) and public housing high-rises in downtown Caracas, Venezuela’s capital and largest city. Named in honor of democracy’s founding date, the neighborhood’s history mirrors the nation’s democratic history. Here, as one long-time resident put it to me, “the fight was fierce.” The fight to secure a democracy more responsive to the needs of the nation’s growing ranks of urban popular sectors in what is Latin America’s most urbanized country. It took place as poverty rose amid oil booms, and rose even more amid oil busts. It took place in the streets and in the polls, as residents made use of both formal and informal democratic tools – protest and the vote – to demand accountability from political leaders. And it took place largely out of view of scholarship that focused more on the institutions of democracy than on its everyday, lived experience.
Barrio Rising captures that experience. The questions it raises about the relationship between formal and informal politics extend beyond Caracas or Venezuela. They strike at the heart of debates over what democracy is – and what it should be – in highly unequal societies."
With that as backdrop, I'm happy to answer any questions you might have on the book or on Venezuelan politics more broadly. Thanks in advance!
Thank you so much for joining us today. As you're here to answer questions not just on the book, but wider Venezuelan politics, I just wanted to let our users know that we'll be loose with our rules concerning recent political topics, but to please be sure to maintain proper decorum in their discussion!
I've read that there a lot of food shortages in Venezuela. If that's the case, what can Venezuelans find with ease these days to eat for breakfast, lunch, and dinner?
Do shortages also affect restaurants and street vendors? For example, is there less selection of arepa fillings than there were, say, 5 or 10 years ago?
Thank you for doing this AMA. Venezuela is a fascinating country I wish I knew more about.
How have indigenous Venezuelans been involved with the transition to democracy? Has the iconography and symbolism of indigenous heritage been adopted by broader Venezuelan political movements as happened with many other countries in Latin America?
Thank you for doing this AMA!
I have a question in particular about the Caracazo of 1989. As I understand and recall it, mainly from Gregory Wilpert's "Changing Venezuela by Taking Power", Carlos Andres Perez was elected in 1988 on a the promise of resisting the imposition of the Washington Consensus, neoliberal reforms, etc, and upon taking office promptly implemented them in the face of decreasing oil revenues and increasing rates of poverty. A protest/riot resulted, and CAP called in the military and killed or injured between 200-3500 people. I found this striking because the estimates and date were so close to Tiananmen, yet there is practically no public knowledge of the Caracazo in the United States. In your opinion, do you consider Tiananmen and the Caracazo comparable historical events, in both quality and quantity of repression, death, etc? A common refrain among the Venezuelan opposition when this is brought up is that it was a riot, and governments have the right to put riots down. Do you buy this explanation?
Further, Chavez was inspired by the Caracazo to attempt his 1992 coup d'etat against CAP. Do you see the Caracazo as a natural inflection point that anticipated the fall of the puntofijismo political structure nine years later? Do you think that that had Chavez successfully overthrown CAP, he would have pursued a path similar to the October Revolution in Guatemala, i.e. holding democratic elections less than a year later, or something more like the Cuban Revolution, using increased social spending and egalitarian-inspired measures, not elections, as a benchmark of democracy (a la Castro's "This is Democracy" speech)?
And more generally, Chavez and Maduro are/have been both criticized considerably for being authoritarian, placing opposition figures, such as Leopoldo Lopez, in jail for extended periods of time (that is not to say that the charges against Lopez are trumped up, many of them actually seem quite plausible). Do you believe that, compared to post-1958 governments, Chavez and Maduro have in fact been relatively repressive/authoritarian? Feel free not to comment on Maduro if you feel it is too recent for proper analysis. I know that Betancourt often ruled through states of emergency, and of course there were no Caracazos under Chavez, so I personally do not quite buy that Chavez was considerably more repressive than his predecessors. However, I am no expert, and am always open to new facts/perspectives.
Why did the barrio develop? Was it a classic case of people from rural areas seeking opportunities in urban spaces?
From the title of your book, and your introduction above, it seems you devote much attention to urban politics.
Can you touch upon how the political concerns of urban Venezuelans compared to more rural inhabitants. I vaguely recall that one of the 19th century caudillos (Paez) originally had his base of support among the cattlemen of the llanos. How much influence and power did these llaneros retain within Venezuelan politics of the late 20th century?
Why is Venezuela's inflation rate so high? What can the government do to reduce it? Would allowing the exchange rate to float to around the black market rate of 600 really help?
From the lead-in you have here, it sounds as if, at least on the surface, Venezuala had weathered the early half of the 20th century quite well politically, and had a much healthier political culture that other South American states. Given that this is a dust-jacket style descriptor, how much of a simplification is that, and also, how was it that the country developed in that direction while its neighbors didn't?
One more question about the upcoming elections and the future of the Bolivarian Republic: in your opinion, how likely is it that the government will resort to violence if they are faced with a credible political opposition? Chavez reportedly threatened violence in 2012 if faced with electoral defeat, and it seems like Chavistas can draw on a large contingent of civilian supporters who are willing to 'defend the revolution' by any means necessary. Is this still the case in 2015 and beyond, or do you foresee an end to the 'Bolivarian experiment' in the near future?
I want to know more, but I don't think I know enough to ask a question up to the standards of this sub. :(
Hi, thanks for doing this AMA. I'm Colombian, so relations with Venezuela are really important for our country. During Alvaro Uribe's tenure as president, he was really belligerent with Hugo Chávez. He even accused Chávez of wanting to expand his bolivarian revolution to Colombia. Is there any reason to think it was the case, or was it only another red herring used by Uribe to hide his government's own corruption problems?
Thank you for this AMA! I wish I had more background info to go off of, but has Venezuela's role internationally (in the sense of alliances I guess – I'm originally from Belarus so the curiosity stems from that) changed markedly in the Maduro era? What the about the perception of other states in the media? Do international politics ever find themselves in the narratives of democracy?
I grew up in Venezuela, and I remember chavez's coup attempt. My family moved to the USA before Chavez was elected, though. My question is this:
The shortages of basic necessities are blamed on the maduro administration, and in some cases, on chavez's as a starting point. It seems to me that the opposition parties that offer alternatives to maduro's policies should be easily able to dominate political discussion.
Yet it also seems to me that the population that supports maduro doesn't think they'd be better off under an opposition party. In other words, they see an opposition as the old guard trying to turn things back to the way they were before Chavez. Is that a fair characterization to make? And if so, how does the hardship they're enduring now compare to that under Caldera or Andres Perez?
In light of the upcoming December elections, which the Chavistas are projected to lose if 'fair and free elections' (feel free to comment on this likelihood/meaning) are to take place, I'd like to hear about current opposition parties and their place within Venezuelan political and social history. From what I've heard, they are very fractured and have little appeal inside the barrios, but i would like to know how the divisions happened and whether the opposition has been able to overcome their weaknesses, especially in the barrios.
I know this is a very broad question, but I unfortunately know too little about Venezuelan politics to get more specific, so feel free to hone in on more interesting/relevant aspects.
How do you think this situation can politically affect Spain?
Do you think the past connection of some of the Podemos political party with Chaves' government can drag their results even more?
Thanks for doing this. I have to ask, what on Earth is going on with Maduro? I have connections I'd rather not detail online, who have had close ties to the upper echelons of Chavismo, and they say that Maduro is completely insulated by a camarilla of opportunists and political extremists. From your, far more professional, study, how true is this?
Thanks for this opportunity!
One of the arguments presented as a defense or at least a counterweight to critiques of Chavismo is that by the measure of average standard of living, particularly for the poorest Venezuelans. An example in English of these sorts of glosses:
He has had two great and undeniable successes in that goal: improving the conditions of the Venezuelan poor, and facilitating the success of other leftist South American movements, in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua and elsewhere. World Bank data shows those living below the poverty line has fallen from 60% to 25%, household consumption has risen from $2000 annually to $3500, while domestic food production has doubled. Extreme poverty has fallen to 6%, up at around 40% during the previous era. In overall social services, spending went from 8% to 20% of GDP.
Could you comment on what you think the major trends in standards of living are in Venezuela over the last few decades, and perhaps as to the specific accuracy/utility of these claims in assessing the Chavismo legacy? If nothing else, I'm interested in the contrast they represent with the American foreign policy establishment's standard criticisms oriented around GDP/Inflation/etc per se.
Meta question - is the application of the 20 years rule in this post suspended? Is this something expected only for AMAs?
Why do you think crime is so high in Venezuela, despite the social advances made through the missions? Can the government do anything about it?
Thank you for this AMA. I live in Caracas and I am starting to get so disappointed about so many things in politics (which I cover). My question is, historically speaking, have we always been so informal for everything? I call us "teenagers" because we seem to have never grown up as a society or as individuals: we always seem to be doing what seems natural at first, try to take every short cut we can and do anythung we can not to get caught. So, have we always been this way? Or is this a recent phenomena? Or am I just whining? If so, please forgive me.