elguapo
12-14-2006, 12:35 PM
The KIDNAPPING OF BOLÍVAR
14.12, 14h16 by Demétrio Magnoli, in 'Estadão'
Simón Bolívar, the Liberator (1783-1830), died in Santa Marta, in Colombia, and his mortal remains were transfered for Caracas, 12 years afterwards. Although he´s respected like hero by all the America Hispanic, his figure occupies a special place in the Venezuela. It is that place that explains the appropriation of his name and of his bequest by Hugo Chávez.
Man of his time, avid reader of Montesquieu and Adam Smith, Bolívar inspired himself in the American Revolution and defended reason, liberty, order and the free market. Visionary, he fought to the end by the unit of the America Hispanic, taking as model the big Republic of the North America.
To 'revolution bolivariana' of Chávez, antiliberal and anti-American, kidnaps the inheritance of the Liberator and hides his own ideological springs. The chavismo drinks in contemporary waters that drain of the thought of the Venezuelan historian Federico I Crush Figueroa (1921-2000), author of an ethnic narrative of the past of the country, and of the Argentine political scientist Norberto Ceresole (1943-2003), controversial personage that entered politics by the peronismo of the left and, in 1987, helped to articulate the military rebellion of Aldo Rich and his 'carapintadas' against the trials of human rights violations in Argentina.
Ceresole became counselor of the military group of Chávez little after his frustrated coup of 1992 and was around the presidential circle to the end of 1999. He enjoyed the friendship and shared the ideas of Robert Faurisson, the intellectual father of the denial of the Holocaust, and of Roger Garaudy, the French intellectual that tried to reconcile communism and Catholicism before converting the Islam and, with Iranian financing, delivered to the militants the diffusion of the antisemitism. The visit of Chávez to Teheran, the proclamation of an ideological alliance with the Iran of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the inauguration of an office of the Jihad Islamic in Caracas are tributes of the Venezuelan president to the lasting influence of the Argentine friend. The youths of left that applaude Chávez in the World Social Forum do not know what they are doing.
To hide the chavismo with the elastic cover of the concept of populism pays tribute to intellectual lethargy. In political science manuals populist are the leaders that identify a relation of domination of the people by a traditional elite and preach a broad intervention of the State in aid of the people. The definition accepts barely everything, of the speakers of the common people in Rome to Mussolini, Chávez and Lula. But, in the History of the Latin America, the populism is an adaptation of the political system to the industrial modernization, a critical transition in which the populist leader conserves the social order amid the whirlwind of change. That leader, that speak for the people day by day and chats with the powerful to the night, binds the social movements in the webs of the State, but promotes true reforms and stimulates an autonomous industrial development.
The 'populist moment', that produced Vargas and Perón, exhausted itself with the globalization. Only the populist style is present in the chavismo, therefore the Venezuela 'bolivariana', on the wrong side of the road of the official rhetoric, knows an evident trial of de-industrialization and petrifies the petroleum characteristics of its economy. Under the influx of high prices of oil, the regime opted for the easiest road, wagering in the state-owned appropriation of income offered by an 'economy of port' that experiences the pleasures of a blast of exports combined with an inflationary blister.
The economy of market subsists in interstices of a petroleum capitalism of State that offers exuberant profits for the high finances and the importers. The very rich voted in Chávez, as well as the batter of the poor men, assisted by the 'missions', that are programs of income "redistribution" yielded by oil prices.
Chávez is fruit of the collapse of the order in the Venezuela, resulting of the historical failure of a corrupt elite. His 'revolution bolivariana' consolidated itself in the sequence of the lockout in the state-owned oil PDVSA and of the attempt of coup d'etat of 2002, and the chants of swan of the defeated elite. The regime eliminated the border that separates State of government, establishing the supremacy of the Executive and bombarding the independence of the Parliament and of the Judiciary.
The chavismo, as political movement, articulates around the military commander a foolish collection of groups that includes semi-fascists, moderate reformists, castristas and even trotskists. The unit of the movement rests about the state-owned control of the exports and depends, crucially, of the maintenance of the present level of prices of the oil. In the internal plan, the immediate priorities of the chavismo are the formation of an unified party and the approval of the unlimited re-election, something that would break the precarious democratic chart in which still moves the country.
In the external plan, Chávez seeks to dislocate Brazil of the center of the political scene. Facing the Caribbean, but situated in the South America, the Venezuela interprets itself as the platform for the unit of the Latin America. The Alternative Bolivariana for the Americas (Alba), that would take form from an energy axis commanded by the Venezuela ('Petroamérica'), is a project of multiple faces: commerce administered, military integration and common social programs. The Venezuela entered in the Mercosul to implode it and raise, about his debris, the 'Big Homeland' chavista.
The South American Common Market - Mercosul, either we reform it or it will be finished. It is not an adequate instrument for the time we are living. "We are going to bury our dead, brothers." ****ounced in front of a pathetic Lula, the words of Chávez show the sense of the foreing politics of Venezuela and the nature of the trap in that entangled, voluntarily, Brazil.
Demétrio Magnoli is a sociologist and doctor in Human Geography by the USP - EMAIL: magnoli@ajato.com.br
14.12, 14h16 by Demétrio Magnoli, in 'Estadão'
Simón Bolívar, the Liberator (1783-1830), died in Santa Marta, in Colombia, and his mortal remains were transfered for Caracas, 12 years afterwards. Although he´s respected like hero by all the America Hispanic, his figure occupies a special place in the Venezuela. It is that place that explains the appropriation of his name and of his bequest by Hugo Chávez.
Man of his time, avid reader of Montesquieu and Adam Smith, Bolívar inspired himself in the American Revolution and defended reason, liberty, order and the free market. Visionary, he fought to the end by the unit of the America Hispanic, taking as model the big Republic of the North America.
To 'revolution bolivariana' of Chávez, antiliberal and anti-American, kidnaps the inheritance of the Liberator and hides his own ideological springs. The chavismo drinks in contemporary waters that drain of the thought of the Venezuelan historian Federico I Crush Figueroa (1921-2000), author of an ethnic narrative of the past of the country, and of the Argentine political scientist Norberto Ceresole (1943-2003), controversial personage that entered politics by the peronismo of the left and, in 1987, helped to articulate the military rebellion of Aldo Rich and his 'carapintadas' against the trials of human rights violations in Argentina.
Ceresole became counselor of the military group of Chávez little after his frustrated coup of 1992 and was around the presidential circle to the end of 1999. He enjoyed the friendship and shared the ideas of Robert Faurisson, the intellectual father of the denial of the Holocaust, and of Roger Garaudy, the French intellectual that tried to reconcile communism and Catholicism before converting the Islam and, with Iranian financing, delivered to the militants the diffusion of the antisemitism. The visit of Chávez to Teheran, the proclamation of an ideological alliance with the Iran of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the inauguration of an office of the Jihad Islamic in Caracas are tributes of the Venezuelan president to the lasting influence of the Argentine friend. The youths of left that applaude Chávez in the World Social Forum do not know what they are doing.
To hide the chavismo with the elastic cover of the concept of populism pays tribute to intellectual lethargy. In political science manuals populist are the leaders that identify a relation of domination of the people by a traditional elite and preach a broad intervention of the State in aid of the people. The definition accepts barely everything, of the speakers of the common people in Rome to Mussolini, Chávez and Lula. But, in the History of the Latin America, the populism is an adaptation of the political system to the industrial modernization, a critical transition in which the populist leader conserves the social order amid the whirlwind of change. That leader, that speak for the people day by day and chats with the powerful to the night, binds the social movements in the webs of the State, but promotes true reforms and stimulates an autonomous industrial development.
The 'populist moment', that produced Vargas and Perón, exhausted itself with the globalization. Only the populist style is present in the chavismo, therefore the Venezuela 'bolivariana', on the wrong side of the road of the official rhetoric, knows an evident trial of de-industrialization and petrifies the petroleum characteristics of its economy. Under the influx of high prices of oil, the regime opted for the easiest road, wagering in the state-owned appropriation of income offered by an 'economy of port' that experiences the pleasures of a blast of exports combined with an inflationary blister.
The economy of market subsists in interstices of a petroleum capitalism of State that offers exuberant profits for the high finances and the importers. The very rich voted in Chávez, as well as the batter of the poor men, assisted by the 'missions', that are programs of income "redistribution" yielded by oil prices.
Chávez is fruit of the collapse of the order in the Venezuela, resulting of the historical failure of a corrupt elite. His 'revolution bolivariana' consolidated itself in the sequence of the lockout in the state-owned oil PDVSA and of the attempt of coup d'etat of 2002, and the chants of swan of the defeated elite. The regime eliminated the border that separates State of government, establishing the supremacy of the Executive and bombarding the independence of the Parliament and of the Judiciary.
The chavismo, as political movement, articulates around the military commander a foolish collection of groups that includes semi-fascists, moderate reformists, castristas and even trotskists. The unit of the movement rests about the state-owned control of the exports and depends, crucially, of the maintenance of the present level of prices of the oil. In the internal plan, the immediate priorities of the chavismo are the formation of an unified party and the approval of the unlimited re-election, something that would break the precarious democratic chart in which still moves the country.
In the external plan, Chávez seeks to dislocate Brazil of the center of the political scene. Facing the Caribbean, but situated in the South America, the Venezuela interprets itself as the platform for the unit of the Latin America. The Alternative Bolivariana for the Americas (Alba), that would take form from an energy axis commanded by the Venezuela ('Petroamérica'), is a project of multiple faces: commerce administered, military integration and common social programs. The Venezuela entered in the Mercosul to implode it and raise, about his debris, the 'Big Homeland' chavista.
The South American Common Market - Mercosul, either we reform it or it will be finished. It is not an adequate instrument for the time we are living. "We are going to bury our dead, brothers." ****ounced in front of a pathetic Lula, the words of Chávez show the sense of the foreing politics of Venezuela and the nature of the trap in that entangled, voluntarily, Brazil.
Demétrio Magnoli is a sociologist and doctor in Human Geography by the USP - EMAIL: magnoli@ajato.com.br