Crisis future repeats past heroes says Venezuelan historian
(Folha de S. Paulo, April 18, 2010)
Venezuelan historian and anthropologist Fernando Coronil, a professor at City University of New York, is author of "The Magic State: Nature, Money and Modernity in Venezuela "(The University of Chicago Press, 1997), considered a modern classic about the Venezuelan government, the relationship with oil and tradition of strong presidents.
In the interview below, he comments on the bicentennial celebrations of independence of Latin America and its significance for leftist governments in the region, the difficult time of Chavez and direction - or lack thereof - in the project of "21st century socialism."
Coronil preparing a book about the failed coup against Chavez in 2002.
SHEET - Of all the governments "refundacionistas" in the region, mention that the goal of "second and final independence," Chávez's who devotes more time to the operation to link to a picture of Bolivar, leader of a popular rebellion and noo patrician unifier. Bolivar has that strength in the minds of Venezuela to justify much investment?
Fernando Coronil-Bolivar has undoubtedly great force in the imaginary Venezuelan. Just review our history and observe that Bolivar is the model of national leader of all our presidents since Guzmán Blanco in the 19th century to Chavez. But the interesting thing is how it is used and why. Where in the Americas elites used the independence as a foundational moment of naçãoe typically saw their own projects as "second independence."
Now there are two new things. Firstly, governments present themselves as "leftists" too announce a second independence, but the foundational moments are no longer only the wars of independence: for Evo Morales are 500 years of struggle anticolonianista; for Kirchner are the struggles of Peronism progressive, Michelle Bachelet to the contract Allende. For Chavez is fundamentally a war of independence because it allows him to present himself as a "second Bolivar." But Chavez has expanded to the genealogy of the Revolution, yesterday spoke of 200 years of struggle, but also 500 years, has joined with the struggles of Bolivar Guaicaipuro, the chief known for his resistance to the English colonizers.
For the people, Chavez is the mestizo, Bolivar, but Guaicaipuro. Yet, as the question suggests, the Bolivar Bolivar Chavez is not the patrician elites Caracas people, but the Bolivar popular so brilliantly analyzed by Yolanda Salas. It
Bolivar redeemer of the common people that we find in the popular imagination Venezuelan both secular and religious - for example, in the religion of Maria Lionza, where Bolívar is, along with Maria Lionza, the highest spirit [syncretic religion with Bolivian common feature with african-Brazilian religions].
Secondly, this reiteration of past heroes is because there is a crisis in future. Neither system offers a reliable future, viable, or the future of capitalism, because capitalism does not bring welfare to all mankind and planet destroyer, nor the future of socialism, for all real socialism were very far from the promised utopia. Then all the leftist presidents, not future models, it has to deal with capitalism in the present, promising a vague future, and seek solid models in the past. The constant celebration of the heroic past repetiçãoe reveals the need to have a solid foundation for the future when the horizon looks fake.
SHEET - Mr. Chavez has said that "produces" history all the time, that the "verbiage" is important part of the government. With the energy crisis and inflation, there is a risk that this "magic words" and especially the oft-repeated "revolution" is over? How do you rate this moment of Chavez?
Coronil - Of course, Chavez is a great magician. This is a difficult time for Chavez. All the charm has to be based on achievements, not only in words. The growing disenchantment in the gulf between the achievements and promises.
The energy crisis, inflation, insecurity, production crisis, corruption are undermining your project. Against the disenchantment, Chavez proposed intensify the polarization of the country between revolutionaries and "bourgeois pitiyanquis. In my opinion, the only strategy that can succeed now is the delight of efficiency. The words, including the vibrant them, are not sufficient to avoid disappointment. Are now necessary work.
SHEET - Chavez insists is necessary to "forward" and "deepen" socialism. He also said this week that if the drop, there will be anarchy. At the same time, there is - or he does not let exista_ no leadership that stands today in addition to Chavez Chavez. What is your assessment?
Coronil - It is clear that Chavez is concerned - for the life of your project and for their own life. To ensure the life of revolution, socialism proposes to deepen. To prevent the assassination, ameaçaa with the radicalization of the revolution. I think that prevents the death of the revolution by creating conditions that lead to a collective welfare. And it avoids the assassination creating the conditions for its leadership is not indispensable - not threatening the opposition like a punishment. If socialism is participatory entãoo deepening of socialism should mean the participation of all in politics and therefore, the emergence of multiple leaders and the reduction of a climate of polarization Others
SHEET - What to expect from the legislative elections of September?
Coronil - I believe that the September elections will cause a healthy change in the Assembly: it will better represent the situation in the country the existence of a strong sector Chavez, but also a varied opposition. Though Chavez did not think so, good for the country is good for deepening democracy, especially the Socialists.
SHEET - You speak of the "state magic" of Venezuela, the presidents of the personalist tradition of Venezuelan petro-states, which shows that the model of leadership is not Chavez exactly new. What is the place of Chavez in Venezuelan history?
CORONA - Chavez represents the apotheosis of an entire tradition of magical States. All petro earlier promised harmony and wellbeing. The new promise is that Chavez Justice: State is a vigilante. Promises welfare for the excluded majority, the oligarchs punishment for exploiters. I believe that Venezuela is one of the few countries in the world where you could have produced a less polarized state vigilante. But even if we took this as a valid option, I believe his place in history will depend its ability to be effectively avenger: reducing inequalities and social exclusion. Chavez is an achievement to have given a majority belong to the country towards the political system. But his greatest challenge is to transform that feeling into a real participation. You still have until 2012 to meet this challenge. The story is slipping from his hands, but maybe there is still time to improve their way and find his place in history.
To improve your way, but I do not think should shrink it with is doing, but expand it. It should not polarize or militarized, but to integrate. It must include competent people, capable of being critical peace - and listen to them. Venezuela has thousands of very qualified electrical engineers. It's amazing that we are experiencing an energy crisis. It is a time for change. If you do not change the pitch, not find a better way.
SHEET - This week, Chavez made a big demonstration to celebrate the reversal coup in 2002. Led to the Bolivar Avenue in downtown Caracas, 35 000 members of the National Bolivarian Militia. This militarization should be cause for concern?
Coronil - This year seemed more important. In the first years after the coup were more discreet celebrations. This year, Chavez spoke at Bolivar Avenue, and I do not remember him having done it before. Not sure what caused the outbreak. But imagine having to do with the elections, with the decline of popularity of Chavez. As I said before, when talking about 200 years of fighting, 500 years of struggle, it's because you're not sure about the future. There were 30 000 people who were somehow obliged to be there. There was a massive popular demonstration, as there have been others in Chavez. Was restricted - the tone was the olive military, not a civic event.
always had concerns about the militarization of a project that is presented as further democracy, which should cover all sectors and guidelines. When we speak of militarization, there is talk of a single voice.
SHEET - When Chavez speaks of socialism, that is inviting the Venezuelans? Mr.. believes there is a plan? As the economy should be in the hands of the state, and must be cooperative?
Coronil - I have tried to track than would be the "21st century socialism," but there's nothing very clear. The experience of social properties, cooperatives have not had much success in the country and are still marginal. What has happened has much more to do with socialism in the 20th century. The nationalization of companies and private property has been happening arbitrarily, without a larger plan. For all we know the farms that were nationalized, the nationalized industries in the State of Guayana are not yielding as well. Paradoxically, the curious thing is that the heart of the economy - the oil industry - it all happens without much discussion, there, where precisely there should be. Paradoxically, while smaller companies are nationalized, the France building in downtown Caracas, the state oil closes negotiations without debate. It may be that the model of joint ventures to operate is the fairest and best, but not discussed. It is a delicate issue, where there is no consensus. And there should be a national consensus. Discuss what UNCLOS should not the State, the technological issue, the issue of foreign reserves as co-owner of ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment