Venezuela - An Empty Revolution?

Criticisms of Hugo Chavez, his authoritarian tendencies and mishandling of the economy, are numerous. Unfortunately many seem to be imbued with an inherent anti-Chavismo that blinds such commentators from any sound judgement based from an initial point of neutrality. Perhaps much in the same way Leftist criticisms of George Bush often stem from an unwavering contempt for the man instead of a detailed understanding of his policy failures.

Whilst reading for my ‘Economics of Latin America’ exam I stumbled across this article in Foreign Affairs by Venezuelan economist Francisco Rodríguex, ‘An Empty Revolution’. A nuanced critique of Chavez’s economic record founded upon a clear understanding of the macroeconomics of populism. And all from someone who actually was within the Chavez government from 2000-2004.

Here is a summary of his findings:

“Even critics of Hugo Chávez tend to concede that he has made helping the poor his top priority. But in fact, Chávez's government has not done any more to fight poverty than past Venezuelan governments, and his much-heralded social programs have had little effect. A close look at the evidence reveals just how much Chávez's "revolution" has hurt Venezuela's economy -- and that the poor are hurting most of all.”

I personally find quite enlightening his ability to frame his argument with a full appreciation for all the positive news that has come out of Venezuela with regard to the perceived poverty reductions, and how many (myself included at times) on the Left in the West try to turn a blind eye to some of the less than positive news that comes out of Venezuela.

”But perhaps an even more important reason for this success is the willingness of intellectuals and politicians in developed countries to buy into a story according to which the dilemmas of Latin American development are explained by the exploitation of the poor masses by wealthy privileged elites. The story of Chávez as a social revolutionary finally redressing the injustices created by centuries of oppression fits nicely into traditional stereotypes of the region, reinforcing the view that Latin American underdevelopment is due to the vices of its predatory governing classes. Once one adopts this view, it is easy to forget about fashioning policy initiatives that could actually help Latin America grow, such as ending the agricultural subsidies that depress the prices of the region's exports or significantly increasing the economic aid given to countries undertaking serious efforts to combat poverty.”