Category: Simon Bolivar

Currently, in the world we live in, there is a growth of corruption in governments all around the world, which negatively affects the lives of millions of people. This ultimately undermines the values and institutions of democracy. However, there is a specific country in South America that is currently undergoing one of the most tragic crises of all time. Hello, my name is Gabriel Fusaro, and today I will be informing you of the political, economic, and environmental crises in which Venezuelans are going through at this very moment. As a Venezuelan, who hears the concerns and problems, my family, in Venezuela are having to endure on a daily basis, I can assure you that this is an evident problem in our world.

First of all, it is important to become familiar with the politics of Venezuela before and after corruption took over the government. In the year 1999, Venezuela held presidential elections where as a result, Hugo Chavez won. Hugo Chavez is notoriously known for the socialist reform he seeked to have in the political system of Venezuela when compared to the strict democracy Venezuela had beforehand. What is socialism you may ask? Socialism is, in simple terms, the means to where the people, not the government, control production and sometimes can decide which products can be produced, its price, etc. Chávez launched what he called the ‘Bolivarian Revolution ” which is basically a reformation for Venezuelan nationalism, and a state-led socialist society as I have mentioned before. It is named Bolivarian, because the liberator of many south American countries, including Venezuela, from Spanish rule, was named Simon Bolivar. He also held meetings which drafted a new Constitution of Venezuela. Chávez was then granted executive power to rule by decree (allow a ruler to edit laws unpredictably) which led to many laws passed that were considered unjust. Chavez was loved by the working class Venezuelans where the poverty rate fell by more than half and education improved. However, because of the shift from being more conservative to pure liberal (socialist), many of Chavez’s supporters and the administration started abusing power. Amongst other issues, he allowed for more power to his benefit, successfully elongated his time as president, and went against TV stations that were politically against him. Once he died in 2013, Nicholas Maduro succeeded Chavez and from there, everything went downhill. He sought leftist policies where the government became a dictatorship, and he set up an assembly where he wrote another constitution and eliminated any opposition. He remains dictator today and is considered illegitimate by over 20 countries.

In addition, given the politics of Venezuela, it is fundamental to know the economic crises that is occurring as of this moment. Many people do not know this, but the largest oil deposit anywhere in the world is in Venezuela, which explains its rich past before Hugo Chavez, having available 300,000 million barrels of oil. As a matter of fact, the main means of revenue of Venezuela comes from natural gas and oil. Maduro in 2014 lowered oil production by approximately 10 percent, which led to oil prices to decrease about 50%. Ultimately, Maduro decided to increase the inflation rate of goods by 800 percent because he thought that this was how this problem was to be solutionized. To understand this rate, look at these examples: According to a statistic by NewsHub.com, “A roll of toilet paper is around 2 million bolívars, or $0.40, and for a 2-pound chicken costs around 14.6 million bolivars or just a little more than two dollars.” Bolivars are the currency of Venezuela and it is evidently clear that Venezuelans will not have that many bills of their currency to buy everyday products. As a result, economically it is known that today, more than 80 percent of Venezuelans are under serious poverty conditions, medicine is unavailable, and Venezuelans have lost an average of 19 pounds in weight since last year.

Furthermore, along with the economic and political crises, there is an environmental crisis in such a well-known country for its beautiful caribbean coast. It has the third-highest deforestation rate in South America, just below Brazil, and one of the world’s largest dams located in Venezuela flooded a massive forest and is right now being eroded by tons of dirt as a result. Other issues include sewage, oil, and urban pollution, in many famous Venezuelan lakes as well as deforestation, urban and industrial pollution, especially along the Caribbean coast. Given the economic crisis, as a result of the political crisis in Venezuela, the cities in Venezuela are becoming extremely dirty and prone to many diseases that can negatively affect the health of humans there, and potentially the animals as well. Although this may tie back to the economic crisis in Venezuela, the environmental crisis is leading to a decline in the rates of tourism, which contributes to the revenue Venezuela receives. All of my family would always describe the beaches of Venezuela as the best in the world, where it doesn’t even compare to the experiences they have had in Florida. However, even though the whole world is undergoing environmental crises, the political and economic effects collectively harms anyone’s desire to visit the country by a long shot. It would make sense that a country with so much potential given its oil capacity would spark international interest and a need to acquire more oil.

In conclusion, today I have informed you of the economic, political, and environmental issues it has today. It is sad to see how this country is often disregarded by the media and is something that many Americans don’t know about. After hearing this speech, you can now have an idea on the detrimental effects of government corruption on its people. Thank you for listening.

Latin American colonies built their independence off a foundation of colonization and conquest. In search for unity and peace, the colonies worked hard to obtain their freedom from the Crown. Although there was a struggle, the journey of Latin America stems from its inhabitants. Friction caused by prejudices, discrimination, and exploitation from the Spanish Crown on the residents of Latin America initiated their uprising. There were many contributing factors leading to the independence of most of Latin America by 1830, including social, political, economic, and ethical conflict along with the influence of many motivated individuals.

The social conflict began when the various social groups of Latin America found themselves being pressured to follow the reforms of the Spanish Crown. In 1500, Latin America witnessed a drastic political change when the Iberians came and conquered the natives and settled upon their land. These invaders worked toward social domination and continued to search for success in riches, the privilege of being served by others, and religious righteousness (Chasteen 2011: 11). Since they remained in control of the region for centuries to come, hegemony developed and the inhabitants of Latin America began feeling angry toward the European colonists and refused to live under the influence of Crown (Chasteen 2011: 57).

The social and ethnic structures in the region caused resentment toward the Crown. A caste system had developed which put Peninsulares, or Spanish-born people of the highest social class, at the top followed by Creoles, Mestizos, and Mullets. This caste system caused tensions to grow and hate to spread throughout social classes, especially between blacks and higher class. This became especially clear as Creoles, such as Simon Bolivar, searched for ways to obtain the same status, wealth, and power of the whites (Chasteen 2011: 94).

During the 1700s, Creole elites discovered the works of Enlightenment thinkers and found inspiration to act, which included Simón Bolivar of Venezuela (Cushman lecture 2019). Bolivar used his position as a military commander to start military campaigns to take back Venezuela. He earned a presidency position in Gran Colombia, where he wrote a constitution for Venezuela based upon equality and unity (Bolivar 1819 Chasteen 2016: 92-99). Bolivar strove to encourage people of South America to rebel against the Spanish colonial rule. He led many forces against the Spaniards and granted liberation to Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia (Class discussion 2019). His actions encouraged some individuals to work for independence, however other key events became important to sparking revolution.

In 1750, the royal administrators in Spain and Portugal tightened control over New World possessions in an attempt to extract more revenue which ended in economic protest (Cushman lecture 2019). This became known as the Bourbon or Pombline Reforms. The purpose was to rationalize and revolutionize the governance of overseas territories by constraining them to act more like colonies (Chasteen 2011: 74-75). By colonizing the region, Spain and Portugal hoped to have increased profitability from the colonies by raising taxes. The tax raise put people out of work and pushed others, such as indigenous people, further into poverty because of their inability to pay the rates (Chasteen 2011: 76). Tension, as a result of the Crown’s actions, grew within Latin America among the castes and it did not take much before rebellion rose.

In 1791, slaves in Haiti revolted against plantation owners. Toussaint L’Overture led an army of former slaves against French elites. In this time, France, Spain, and Britain sent armies to fight on the side of the French, however, this did not stop the rebels. They reached victory as slavery was abolished in Haiti and Toussaint’s forces took control of the island (Cushman lecture 2019). A few years later, Napoleon sent an army to take over Haiti once again and in time Toussaint was captured, the French were forced to surrender and Haiti declared its independence. The result of this revolt scared other Creoles who strived to obtain power but did not want to face economic or social changes that could possibly threaten how they lived. Although, this revolution did inspire other slave conspiracies and rebellions; it would just take something bigger for independence to be achieved (Cushman lecture 2019).

That spark that created the shatter of the colonial compact was ignited between 1807 and 1808 when Napoleon invaded Spain and Portugal and the leaders in Latin America saw weakness as an opportunity to claim independence from colonial rule (Cushman lecture 2019). Prince João of Portugal pursued refuge in Brazil and developed the colony into the seat of government for Portugal, placing new reforms on the colonists (Chasteen 2011: 92). João left Portugal in hopes that it would prevent a liberal government from forming in the nation. In 1822, when independence movements broke out, as a result of fear of Portugal forcing Brazil back to colonial status, Prince Pedro took responsibility and initiated the break away from the colonial compact. Once their independence was gained, Emperor Pedro strived to develop a working conservative government (Cushman lecture 2019). Liberal Brazilians did not agree with all of his attitudes, however as conservatives remained in power, there was hardly any political protest. Aside from Brazil, Peru also had two important figures which helped shape the independence movement.

Juana Azurduy and José Santos, of Peru, had a great impact on their region during the liberation protests. Juana Azurduy was a representative of the mestiza population and was admired greatly for her courage and bravery as she fought fight along the patriot guerillas in the Viceroyalty of Rio de la Plata. She is mostly honored for her high ranks and dedication to Bolivian and Argentinian independence. Her heroism was thought to inspire future generations of women at the time, even though the new colonies remained just as patriarchal as before. José Santos, however, is best known for his diary entries which highlight the situation of indigenous individuals caught in the guerilla war crossfire. His writing shows what means people would resort to in order to save their lives including switching sides during the war and fighting for the other sides (Chasteen Latin American voices reader pg. 77). As a result of his work, people became inspired to remain loyal to their native attitudes. The influences by these two individuals inspired different social groups to transform their attitudes about liberation.

One of the final countries to gain its independence was Mexico, as a result of the constitution Spain designed for its country. The inhabitants of Mexico feared this document would affect the Spanish colonies (Chasteen 2011: 104). Therefore, creoles, mestizos, and indigenous people in Mexico came together to overthrow the Spaniards and become independent. Around 1825, Latin American independence movements came to an end, however, the goal was not achieved. The original idea was to create a nation of unity, however, rivals between nations (regarding power) got in the way. As a result, peace became hard to achieve. Post-colonial writers such as Domingo Sarmiento and Henry Koster provide some ideas for reestablishing political and social peace in these nations.

Henry Koster was a post-colonial writer of slavery in Brazil. He believed in order to reach peace in Latin American nations, keeping a caste system was key. In his writing, his discussion emphasizes how the slavery in Brazil is a brotherhood and should not be infringed on, unlike U.S. slavery which was considered more intense. Also, he mentions how free black and free mulattos did have opportunities to rise socially, it just was not as easy for free blacks. In his work Travels of Brazil, Koster talks about a militia where all the officers and men are of mixed caste, which supports his idea to continue a caste system, because even with this system, individuals still managed to work together peacefully (Koster in Chasteen 2016: 88). Koster also stressed the importance of maintaining religion, Christianity and Catholicism, in the nations where they existed. Along with Koster, Sarmiento also established his own views for peace and prosperity in the Latin American nations.

Sarmiento’s political and social ideas for restoring peace are evident in his book Facundo: Civilization and Barbarism. Sarmiento uses Juan Facundo Quiroga as a symbol to represent how the manifestation of the issues that arose between civilization and barbarism faced by the peoples of the Americas, because of their revolutionary experience, had turned violence into a lifestyle. Quiroga participated in the revolution of Spain and soon after became a highly recognized individual in Argentina. He developed a sense of federalism as he wanted to preserve his control over his regions and rose to command in the army quickly, leading forces against the president of Argentina. Quiroga worked side by side with Juan Manuel de Rosas, who supported unitarian ideals. Sarmiento uses Rosas and Facundo to demonstrate civilization and barbarism, but also to express his support for unitarians.

In this case, Sarmiento believes life inside towns and cities is what keeps economic and social peace. He believes a lack of civilization and an excess of nature will lead to a loss of morality which threatens existing civilization. He uses Facundo to define barbarism and the effects of living outside of the city. He describes this lifestyle as being frightening and insecure, where “society has altogether disappeared” (Sarmiento [1845] 1998: 21). In contrast, cities are a place of learning and progress. In the cities, the inhabitants are not expected to fight nature in order to survive. There is peace and prosperity. This ideal is represented by Juan Manuel de Rosas who was city raised and encouraged the ideas of unitarians. As Sarmiento writes, a bias toward unitarian concepts develops as a result of the negative representation of “federales” expressed throughout the book.

As Sarmiento defends his argument that city life represents peace, he provides some interesting generalizations to prove his point. For example, Sarmiento’s theory is that the region a person descends from determines their character. Outside of cities in Argentina settles rough terrain: mountains, deserts, forests. All of which are very hard to overcome. Therefore, individuals who settle in these places are required to fight for their lives and become violent as they constantly battle with the nature around them. However, people who descend from the city are much more prestigious and respected because they live in a uniform society. A city is a community which thrives with culture, religion, education, and wealth. In comparison, city dwellers are expected to be more civilized and anyone else is barbaric. These ideas and theories from Sarmiento contribute to what needs to be done for possible social and political peace in the new Latin American nations.

Latin America is a region filled with many nations, all of which developed through social, political, economic, and ethical battles. The actions of individuals such as Toussaint L’Overture, Simón Bolivar, Prince João, Prince Pedro, José Santos Vargas, Juana Azurduy, and Juan Facundo Quiroga contributed to the independence movements of Latin America and inspired individuals all around the region. Post-colonial theories provide some insight of what could be done for the nations to reach ultimate peace and unity following their independence. In the end, through a long battle, most of Latin America was able to achieve independence by 1830 and the consequences of their struggles are still apparent to this day.

Works Cited

1. Chasteen, John Charles. Born in Blood and Fire: A Concise History of Latin America. New York: W.W. Norton, 2011.
2. Chasteen, John Charles. Born in Blood and Fire: Latin American Voices. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2016.
3. Cushman, Gregory. “The Colonial Heritage of Latin America”, “The Age of Revolutions & Latin American Independence”. Lecture. The University of Kansas. Lawrence, KS. 2019.
4. Sarmiento, Domingo Faustino, Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, and Ilan Stavans. Facundo, or, Civilization and Barbarism. New York, NY, U.S.A. Penguin Books, 1998.

Background

Since Simón Bolívar’s independence movement resulted in the liberation of most of the Americas, Latin America has lived with a certain affinity for military leaders and their charisma. This affinity has been a blessing and curse with the likes of Peron and Pinochet creating terror in their countries with the use of military regimes. Venezuela, even though blooming with oil wealth as one of the richest countries in the world, would be no exception to that. It would all start with one man, Hugo Rafael Chavez Frias. After a two-party system led the country for many years, an economic shock in the 1980s led many of the lower-class citizens of the country to be at odds with these parties, whomst both remained capitalist in belief (Fisher). In 1992, a group of military officers that envisioned a more leftist political system attempted to overthrow the government of President Perez (Fisher). They failed and were imprisoned but their legacy would not fail. The man how led this movement, Chavez himself, would not give up here. His message of an anti-establishment system had reverberated within the Venezuelans that were struggling economically. After the government loosened election rules and President Caldera freed him, Chavez had a clean shot at the presidency. He ran on promises he knew he could not fulfill but that he knew would catapult him to the presidency by creating a false illusion in the population, he had revived populism in Latin America (Meznar). Chavez would go on to call it the Bolivarian Revolution.

Constitution Remake

Chavez’s first obstacle in his quest for an omnipotent government was the country’s constitution. Venezuela’s constitution, established in 1961, was made with the explicit intent to avoid an authoritarian regime at all costs. It prohibited re-election and constitutional reform (Zambrano). Chavez hoped to change this and so he ran on a constitutional reform platform during his presidency. As Stanford associate professor Zambrano argues, “A referendum that can override any constitution eliminates the boundary between constitutional law and politics” (Zambrano). Chavez’s goal was to leave the cornerstone of a nation’s democracy at the mercy of a majority unknowledgeable and ignorant majority that would vote for the reform just as they did for his election. While many challenged this idea at the country’s supreme tribunal, the tribunal sided with Chavez, arguing that the people had u, image authority over any constitutional constraints (Zambrano). Only 38 percent of the electorate would turn out to vote for the referendum, handing Chavez his constituent assembly (Zambrano). This meant that only a small representation of the country had just given Chavez 90 percent control of the country’s parliament. From now on, Chavez’s reign would only take the country in a very steep fall.

Complete Override

As soon as Chavez and his Constitutional Assembly asserted this power, they moved to swiftly suspend the original Congress and Supreme Court by arguing that they did not embody the people’s views as much as his Constitutional Assembly and him did (Zambrano). Both the Supreme Court and the assembly protested this move but were shut down after threats of violence by Chavez if his demands were not listened to. Two months after this, The Supreme Court released a decision on a case in which it stated that “the new Constituent Assembly was a supra-constitutional body and thus cannot be subject to the limits of the existing judicial order, including the current Constitution (Zambrano). This handed Chavez total and final control and power over any opposing institutions which allowed him to move forward with the new constitution after a second low turnout referendum. This new constitution gave Chavez an extension of term limits, abolished Congress, and most importantly allowed for immediate Presidential re-election (Zambrano). Chavez had just reshaped the image of the Presidency as one of omnipotence that would open a door to authoritarianism.

Destruction of Private Property

During his tenure, Chavez privatized thousands of private sector industries which amazed his followers but worried business owners (Carrillo). The largest takeover of such was his takeover of the Venezuelan oil fields, the country’s single largest source of revenue. Chavez converted the fields into a state-owned oil company called PDVSA. This nationalization gave the government complete profit from the oil (Rajagopal). A lot of this profit would however not go into the investment of national infrastructure but rather the pockets of Chavez’s loyalists. In 2002, the state oil company went on strike as anger was created due to Chavez’s extreme control on the oil and the controversial appointment of inexperienced people to the board because of loyalism (Rajagopal). This strike and opposition forced Chavez out of power. He, however, found his way back to power and retaliated the strikes and nationwide protests with changes that involved firing 18,000 workers and consolidating control (Rajagopal). Chavez continued to do his best to isolate the few private oil companies left such as Exxon and ConocoPhillips by seizing their assets in the country (Lavelle). Chavez continued this policy until he drained all private companies out of the Venezuelan oil fields, leaving the oil industry in the country with very limited expansion potential. Chavez left Venezuela’s oil industry frozen in age with no ability to update many of its drilling systems, therefore leaving harder to drill rich areas untapped (Rajagopal). Another of Venezuela’s mistakes with oil was its subsidized partnerships with other socialist nations. Venezuela’s partnership with socialist nations such as Cuba, Bolivia, and Argentina at the time allowed for them to sell oil at discounted prices for those countries in exchange for loyalty. This part of the plan would also help expand Chavez’s legacy into a new wave of socialism that would expand to most countries in Latin America. Therefore the misappropriation of those funds and discounted rates would mean that the same resource that took Venezuela to the world stage would also be the one to destroy it.

Bolivarian Missions

Using the money from the rising oil revenues that resulted from the nationalization of the industry, Chavez created social programs called Bolivarian Missions. While these ideas seemed genuine attempts at alleviating the needs of the poor, Chavez made it quite unsustainable system for them. The programs covered many areas, from “adult literacy programs, free community health care, low-income housing construction, and subsidizing food and other consumer goods” (Rajagopal). While malnutrition and unemployment dropped and daily calorie intake increased, the way the country handled them made it a long-term problem. Since the missions were based on funding by the oil revenue, they became unsustainable. As Venezuela’s expenditures started to exceed its revenue and the oil production fell due to the nationalization of the industry, Venezuela started to fail to pay its bills for the missions.

Violence and Colectivos

After the attempted overthrow of 2002, Chavez found a way to suppress opposition and maintain power by creating loyalist armed groups so he wouldn’t have to rely only on military support (Fisher). These groups are the collectivos. They funneled money and arms from the government to become political enforcers by wreaking havoc at anti-government protests (Fisher). Feared by protesters as the most lethal of enforcement forces, colectivos would arrive on motorcycles to protest while shooting towards protesters and chanting government mottos. According to Rocio San Miguel, a defense analyst from Venezuela, “They are vital as a defense mechanism in breaking up protests and generating fear in the civil population… They are the operating arm of the state.” (Taylor). Their constant presence has led to people in low-class neighborhoods and slums to avoid demonstrations against the government, fearing that their food handouts or even lives will be taken away (Taylor). Colectivos even control entry and exit points in many slums and have become the reason for a spike in crime rates in the country as according to Alejandro Velasco, a New York University professor who studies colectivos, “the groups were later joined by criminal opportunists who learned that “adding a little ideology to their operations could win them impunity” (Fisher). This creates total anarchy and violence that goes unchecked by corrupt police departments, making Venezuela one of the most dangerous countries in the world. According to the Venezuelan Observatory of Violence, Venezuela saw 26,000 homicides in 2017 alone, 15 times more than the global average (AFP). Venezuela became a country-sized crime scene where it seemed more important for criminals to rob people of their lives than their belongings.

“Choose Maduro”

These were Chavez’s words during his last public address before his death in 2013. His followers listened, or so the National Election Center tells us after a controversial vote count during Maduro’s election. Chavez had left Maduro with a struggling economy, high crime rates, and a starving population. Maduro had no experienced and was a former bus driver facet that proved worrisome for Venezuelans. Unable to pay for all social programs and government subsidies, Maduro started printing more money. This started to drive up inflation and make daily grocery runs impossible for Venezuelans (Taub). This made Maduro start rolling out price controls and getting rid of zeros in the currency to maintain bill denominations small. This created a decrease in imports and forced businesses so shut down. Maduro continued to print money, inflation continued to rise, hitting 53,798,500 percent at the start of 2019, according to the Venezuelan Central Bank (Cedrom). Food continued to become scarce and Maduro hung into a thread that was kept together by the social programs he was struggling to pay. This cycle would destroy and continue to destroy the country’s economy (Fisher). As Maduro started to avoid printing more money, he resorted to patronizing parts of the government. Maduro put family members and military officers in charge of important food and drug trades around the country that kept them loyal and kept their pockets full (Fisher). Gold mining rights in protected areas of the Amazon were also given to China to help pay off the debt that Venezuela owed to them. As the prices continued to spike on the street, black markets bloomed, becoming the mainstream way of acquiring basic goods at inflated prices (Fishers). Colectivos capitalized on this issue and started running many of these back markets, making small business owners pay them in order to stay in business without having their business vandalized. Maduro was not the cause of the crisis, but he had just escalated and catalyzed the crisis even more.

Health Crisis

When Venezuela stopped publishing health statistics in 2017, there was cause for concern. But until recent reports, the magnitude of the crisis has been public. Before Chavez, Venezuela was a leading country in terms of medical advancement in South America. Today, however, it struggles to fight vaccine-eradicated diseases such as measles and diphtheria that reappeared after the economic crisis started (Schreiber). Maternal mortality rose in number of cases with a 65 percent increase in a year. Infant deaths increased as well, with a 30 percent increase in this during a year (US State Department). The lack of available and proper medical facilities helped exacerbate the crisis as well; according to Doctors for Health, “76 percent of hospitals surveyed had deficiencies in laboratory testing, 70 percent saw lapses in radiology services, 67 percent suffered electricity shortages, and 70 percent were experiencing water shortages” (US State Department). The country also saw an increase in Tuberculosis cases, the highest its been in four decades with 13,000 cases in 2017. New HIV infections and AIDS-related deaths have increased sharply, according to the Pan American Health organization with the researchers arguing that the vast majority of HIV-positive Venezuelans do not currently have access to antiretroviral medications (Schreiber). Said research also estimated that new HIV infections increased by 24 percent from 2010 to 2016, which was the last year that the government published health data (Schreiber). Nearly 9 out of 10 Venezuelans known to be living with HIV at the time were not receiving antiretroviral treatments (Schreiber). The report also found that 1.3 million people who used to be able to feed themselves in Venezuela have had difficulty doing so since the economic crisis began three years ago (Kohut). Caritas, examined children in working-class areas in multiple states around the country since last year and found out that” fifty-four percent of children in them suffer from some sort of malnutrition” (Kohut). This number is only expected to keep rising as the economic crisis worsens and Maduro’s government continues to cover up the struggles of a worsening free health care system, Venezuela becomes malnourished and a ticking time bomb of an epidemic for the continent.

Fleeing Their Homes

As the country’s situation continued to worsen, many people were forced to leave the country to find a better future. The country’s migration situation was far more critical than this, creating today what is one of the most largest and most complex population displacements in Latin American history. According to the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) and International Organization for Migration (IOM), The exodus means Venezuelans are now ‘one of the single largest population groups displaced from their country’ (BBC). The agencies estimate that around 4 million Venezuela,s have fled the country up until the start of 2019, meaning the number has most likely continued to rise since then. According to Voices of America, more than half of the Venezuelans leaving are heading for Colombia. Hundreds of thousands are also heading to countries further south like Ecuador, Peru, and Chile. Smaller pockets of the population are leaving Venezuela through the remote border with Brazil (VOA)L More than 28,000 filed asylum petitions in the U.S. last year alone as well, making Venezuelans one of the top asylum requesters in recent years (VOA). According to UN estimates around 5,000 people leave the country every day. While comparing the Syrian refugee crisis, Voices of America states that “by comparison, at the height of Europe’s migrant crisis in 2015, Germany took in 900,000 refugees from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Turkey currently houses around 3.5 million Syrian refugees” (VOA). Venezuela’s situation is also starting to resemble Syria’s due to the impact and crisis that it is creating to neighboring countries as they struggle to deal with the extreme immigration numbers coming from Venezuela. Many governments in the continent are starting to argue that the large number of immigrants is putting restraints on social services due to the fact that most Venezuelans have no money for basic goods and care after fleeing. Some areas within these countries have taken to drastic measures like Roraima in northern Brazil declaring a state emergency last year after 30,000 Venezuelans arrived in the state capital (VOA). This extreme migration has also led to a rise in xenophobia towards Venezuelans around the world. While most countries were sympathetic and cordial to Venezuelans initially as the country provided very well-prepared and wealthy professionals, the migration now having shifted as a general one of all the classes has created fear within native populations (Fieser). The fear is not of violence or gangs but rather of job competition as Venezuelans of lower status pose more of a threat to the average worker in other countries (Fieser). Even outside of the country, Venezuelans suffer the aftermath of the Venezuelan regime’s choices.

Conclusion

While many argue that Chavez’s work and policies were for the people and of the people. the evidence of the long-term effects of his work, especially after his death would suggest otherwise. Using his charisma and relatability to the poor working class of Venezuela, Chavez convinced this majority group that he was the solution to the economic clashes of the past parties that were based on capitalism. Chavez ran on the emotions and passions of the changes people wanted, not the pragmatic analysis of natural politics. Chavez created a utopia that could only exist in his head. Chases created an authoritarian system that simultaneously depended on democracy to stay afloat. Simon Bolivar once said that “Republican democracy is ever perfect and demands political virtues and talents far superior to our own.” There will be men who will take advantage of this fact and push the boundaries were we cannot discern between the over-perfect ideal and the authoritarian mind. Chavez’s slow transition to authoritarianism made this line even harder to see. Once Venezuelans had realized the consequences of Chavez’s actions, it was too late to turn back. This research supports this idea and the idea that Venezuela’s demise was not the cause of a secret CIA conspiracy or an economic war by the Venezuelan opposition and the Colombian right but rather the product of one man. Chavez promised free healthcare system and left the county’s health system in shambles with no fully functioning hospitals. Chavez promised beautiful free houses and left the country with buildings that had failing foundations. Chavez promised increased safety and security and left the country with armed groups that run the streets like anarchy. Chavez promised a trustworthy successor and left the country with an inexperienced bus driver who sold the Amazon to China. Chavez promised stability and left the country with millions of Venezuelans leaving looking for stability elsewhere. Chavez promised Chavismo.