Category: Web Articles

As a frequent visitor to Venezuela through many different regimes, including that of Hugo Chavez, I see him as genuinely trying a model of development beyond the ” Washington Consensus” . I observed the attempted coup first hand, which would have been much worse, had it succeeded, and the subsequent efforts by the Fedecamera and the PDVSA mgmt to try to unseat Chavez by destroying the economy. Since neither of these attempts by the ” oligarchs” succeeded, it’s time to give Chavez , despite some of his faults, a chance ,since he is democratically elected. So I think you might adjust your obvious bias in favor of the “Washington Consensus” orthodoxy, and admit that a new wave of resource nationalism is sweeping Latin America, not just Venezuela.

Yes, I agree that Hugo Chavez representes the type of Populist leader sought by the less favored of the Latin American population, regardless of which country they are in. Unfortunately, globalization needs more time to show some of the possible benefits but the working poor of LA cannot wait. The Group of 8 should pay more attention and run a PR campaign to foster a favorable view of all the economic and political changes needed to implement a full globalized economy.

Any person who wants rule a country for 30+ years is obsessed with power, not the well-being of the people. Chavez uses the poor to stay in power. He will provide just enough token “benefits” to the poor to remain in office. However, his main goal and focus is to enrich himself and his cronies, and to stoke an incredibly large ego.

I would have to agree with the editor’s comments. Although I would expand the horizon to include all countries where policy-makers fail to make a significant difference. Part of the problem stems from the nature of politics. Where the improvements to a society span many years, a policy-maker would have to remain in office for many years to see their plan move to completion. But as the policy-maker’s term in office ends, their plan may not be complete. A new policy-maker comes in with a new plan which may turn the original plan 180, if not 90 degrees in another direction. Thus one aspect of our political risk. What is needed is a single agenda that should be followed thru to completion. Until that happens, policy-makers will fail and charismatic “leaders” who swoon the uneducated masses will continue to rise to office. Those “leaders” will remain in power more thru force, than delivering the promises of an improved standard of living and engendering hope at the lowest levels of society.

I am almost tempted to say populism is Latin America’s contribution to political science. The issue is not Chavez, but why the region tend to have these type of leaders? The answer has to do with the extremely high levels of income inequality . When orthodox economic policies are adopted, Latin America’s economic imbalances are corrected, but the elites often fail to move forward to a process of reform that eliminates the barriers of social mobility and class discrimination. With time, a populist leader emerges who captures the imagination of the majority and uses the improved macroeconomic fundamentals to promise a short term solution for a long term problem. The end result is of course inflation and costy economic adjustments. What could be done in the region to break that cycle…?

The question is not very clear. It seems that it wants to detach “policy makers” from “presidents” when for me is simple: a president is a policy maker, period!. And that is why economic policy is so interlinked with politics and that political power become paramount in order to push for laws and policies that make a real change. In conclusion political power is a tool for economic transformation and “policy makers” should understand once and for all that political and people’s support is simply a must to really turn things around.

Agree