You are here:   Dispatches > Caracas: Chávez's Secret Fan Club
 

Landing in Caracas just before last November's elections for governors, mayors and legislators, I found a city ravaged by ten years of the Chávez regime, pocked with the colourful posters of grinning candidates. Caraqueños - as Caracas inhabitants are called - have been torn apart by a low-level civil war of chavistas (as his supporters are called) versus opposition, with campaign posters standing in for gang colours. A preponderance of red means you're in a chavista area. Red portraits of Chávez himself painted on the walls means you are not in the Country Club any more, Toto. I drive until the posters turn blue, green or yellow.

Chávez has held a Wizard of Oz sway since he burst on to the political scene as a putschist general with his failed coup in February 1992. His one-minute TV appearance to call back his troops would make him a cult hero and change Latin America forever when he said his quest for social justice was unsuccessful "por ahora" ("for now"). But prevail he did at the next election, riding a wave of anger and riots all the way to the presidential palace.

In his decade as president, Chávez has parlayed socioeconomic resentment into near-invincibility. But the chinks in the armour were there for all to see in December 2007, when he lost a referendum on the constitutional changes that would have extended his dictatorial powers to rule by decree, suspending civil rights and effectively making him president for life. He quickly turned defiant: "For me, this isn't a defeat. This is por ahora."

Whether it was or not would be determined on 23 November, and no one was taking any chances. Chávez delivered fiery speeches every day, broadcast live on all six state TV stations before oceans of red. Ignoring his rants, the opposition toiled on. But would they be able to win over the throngs of chavistas?

Chavistas come in four broad categories. First, there are the poor ones. These are the ignorant and desperate hordes, filling the TV screens at every Chávez rally with a sea of red shirts that the rally organisers bribe them to wear with a combination of money and alcohol. They earn more by attending a rally than they would with an honest day's work, if they could get it. Regardless of their poverty, they continue to revere Chávez like a personal god or conquering hero, for he looks and sounds like them as he rants against the wealthy.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
answers?
January 5th, 2009
2:01 PM
Three basic questions facing those who favor authoritarian or totalitarian governments: Would you want to live under one? Do you have the moral right to enjoy the freedoms (e. g., the right to hotly criticize your government, the right to organize demonstations against those in power, the right to work to remove those in power, etc.) that you would deny to others? If you claim that right, on what moral basis does it rest?

Anonymous
January 5th, 2009
1:01 PM
This article is clearly the very biased diatribe of a person who lived a very privileged life in Venezuela. Mr Chavez is not perfect, by any means, but his opposition is worse. During the 2001 coup attempt, they turned the tanks on te people. During the 2002-2003 strike, they tried to cripple the only livlihood of all Venezuelans. Yes, life in the Country Club is not the same as before, but the violence and class hatred comes more from the decades of abuse, of unbelievable discrepancies between the rich and the poor. Does the author remember the mass slaughter of civilians in 1989 as a result of Carlos Andres Perez' ill-considered economic policies and his government's brutal repression of civil unrest? Something had to change, and the change is happening , like it or not. True, this government has many flaws--corruption is rampant, there is more violence in the streets--but it has also made some important changes in the social structure, not only in Venezuela but in the rest of South America. A more balanced view might be more persuasive.

Anonymous
January 5th, 2009
11:01 AM
She should stop whinning. This is what's wrong with elitist thinking

Anonymous
January 5th, 2009
5:01 AM
wow, stuart... a bit difficult to think there is any hope for Venezuela if it must "reside in a rise in the rule of law" when the "law" is whatever the dictator says it is.

stuart munro
January 5th, 2009
1:01 AM
I'm afraid this article is not persuasive. After seeing John Pilger's film The War on Democracy, it seems clear that whatever faults Chavez has pale in comparison to those of his political opponents. Little tricks like the attempted armed overthrow of Chavez when was popularly elected, and the propaganda films released to the western press pretty much discredit the views of writers like Neumann. As for Venezuela, its hope for a peaceful future must reside in a rise in the rule of law. One facet of that would probably preclude private armed security forces.

Anonymous
January 4th, 2009
7:01 PM
I believe the author has fooled herself. She should question her child-eyes view of Venezuela. The adult might have noticed the dispossessed before Chavez rallied them. And the adult would have to decide whether the Chavistas are paid lackeys or worshippers of a Demi-God, whereas this author sees no contradiction in calling them both. The author expresses the paranoia of the rich in condemning hidden counry club Chavistas only to mention the paranoia explicitly while not seeing it in herself. Still, as an American, the day the people stop supporting Chavez is the day I will be happy to see him go.

Morris
January 4th, 2009
7:01 PM
I am an Italian born American who has family near Caracas and have viste there many times. In my humble opinion I have seen huge change from 1982 till 2008 in Venezuela. Basically from bad to good to great to o.k. to horrible to now utterly pathetic. What the heck is Chavez thinking? One of the greatest sins man can perform is greed. Do not let this wolf in sheep's clothing cloud the true good hearted, hard working spirit of the Venezuela majority

Pulseguy
January 4th, 2009
6:01 PM
Ms. Neumann's comment that there was no class hatred in the '70s suggests she is out of touch with what she writes. Of course, there was class hatred in the 70s; and the 60s, the 80's etc. There always is class resentment. And, the rich will always be villified in simplistic terms, as will the poor. Chavez will stay until even the hordes can see past his rhetoric, then he will escape with his billions and the average Venezuelan will be left with the clean-up.

Edward
January 4th, 2009
5:01 PM
Neumann's writings ensure continued success for Chavez. The only people who sympathise w/ Neumann are other Neumann's of which there are few and she writes even they are split. Good riddance.

Anonymous
January 4th, 2009
4:01 PM
If Hugo the Terrible stays there will be repression and death. If Hugo the Terrible goes there will be repression and death.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
More Dispatches
Popular Standpoint topics