Antioch UniversityAURA - Antioch University Repository and Archive
Dissertations & Theses Student & Alumni Scholarship, includingDissertations & Theses
2015
“El No Murio, El Se Multiplico!” Hugo Chávez :The Leadership and the Legacy on RaceCynthia Ann McKinneyAntioch University - PhD Program in Leadership and Change
Follow this and additional works at: http://aura.antioch.edu/etdsPart of the African American Studies Commons, African History Commons, American Politics
Commons, American Studies Commons, European History Commons, Inequality and StratificationCommons, International Relations Commons, Latin American History Commons, Latin AmericanStudies Commons, Latina/o Studies Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Leadership StudiesCommons, Peace and Conflict Studies Commons, Policy History, Theory, and Methods Commons,Political History Commons, and the Race and Ethnicity Commons
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student & Alumni Scholarship, including Dissertations & Theses at AURA - AntiochUniversity Repository and Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations & Theses by an authorized administrator of AURA - AntiochUniversity Repository and Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected].
Recommended CitationMcKinney, Cynthia Ann, "“El No Murio, El Se Multiplico!” Hugo Chávez : The Leadership and the Legacy on Race" (2015).Dissertations & Theses. 208.http://aura.antioch.edu/etds/208
“ EL NO MURIO, EL SE MULTIPLICO!”
HUGO CHÁVEZ: THE LEADERSHIP AND THE LEGACY ON RACE
CYNTHIA ANN McKINNEY
A DISSERTATION
Submitted to the Ph.D. in Leadership and Change Program
of Antioch University
in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
May, 2015
This is to certify that the Dissertation entitled:
“EL NO MURIO, EL SE MULTIPLICO!” HUGO CHÁVEZ: THE LEADERSHIP AND THE LEGACY ON RACE
prepared by
Cynthia Ann McKinney
is approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Leadership and Change.
Approved by:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Al Guskin, Ph.D., Chair date _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Philomena Essed, Ph.D., Committee Member date _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Peter Dale Scott, Ph.D., Committee Member date _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Joseph Jordan, Ph.D., External Reader date
i
Acknowledgments
My Father
My Mother
My Son
My Supportive Family
My Auntie Hazel who survived Jim Crow, but not the U.S. health scare industry
Frank, Katie, and Brian Jackson
John Judge
Antioch University visionaries Al Guskin and Laurien Alexandre
Antioch Faculty, and oh what would we do without Deb!
My supportive Cohort 11
My Dissertation Chair, Al Guskin, and Dissertation Committee
Participants
Dr. Donald Smith and Phil and Elaine Smith
Mario Chatman and Jocco Baccus
Community of Scholars whose work paved the way for this work
Community of supporters and well wishers whose moral support was invaluable, like
Henrietta Antoinin, Faye Coffield, Brother Steve, and Brenda Clemons
Norman Dale for editing
Mirna Lascano for everything!
Donald DeBerardinis who didn’t run away from his computer screaming every time I called
Glen Ford and Dedon Kamathi, and J.R. Valrey–Power to the People!
Unwavering Friends, including Lucy Grider-‐Bradley and Ms. Claude Shaw
David Josué
Eddie Slaughter, Black Farmers, and Reverend Pinkney–Still Fighting to Free the Land!
Dr. Ricardo Wheatley
North South University Vice Chancellor Dr. Amin Sarkar
The Green Party of the United States
All Independent Thinkers
ii
Dedication
El No Murio, El Se Multiplico!
(“He Has Not Died; He Has Multiplied!”)
Mourners at funeral of Hugo Chávez (Photograph courtesy of AFP Photo/Leo Ramirez)
Graffiti in Caracas, meaning, “I am Chávez” (Photograph by author, 2013)
iii
Abstract
“Chávez, Chávez, Chávez: Chávez no murio, se multiplico!” was the chant outside the National
Assembly building after several days of mourning the death of the first President of the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. This study investigates the leadership of Hugo Chávez and
his legacy on race as seen through the eyes and experiences of selected interviewees and his
legacy on race. The interviewees were selected based on familiarity with the person and
policies of the leadership of Hugo Chávez and his legacy on race. Unfortunately, not much has
been written about this aspect of Hugo Chávez, despite the myriad attempts to explain his
popularity with the Venezuelan people up to the time of his death. It is expected that, as a
result of this research, a clearer picture of Hugo Chávez will emerge. The resulting profile of
Hugo Chávez focuses on him as a person of power as well as of color—of African and
Indigenous descent—who was able to free himself from a colonial mindset (and its
oftentimes accompanying internalized racism) and thereby gain the attention of oppressed
peoples across the planet who sided with him as he used his power to challenge
neoliberalism, the U.S. government, and those who wield power on neoliberalism’s behalf
inside Venezuela. This research serves as important infrastructure for understanding Hugo’s
race-‐conscious leadership in resistance to internalized racism and European domination.
This dissertation is accompanied by an MP4 author introduction video, a PDF Dissertation
Supplement, and four participant supplemental files: two MP3 audio files and two MP4
videos. This dissertation is available in Open Access AURA: Antioch University Repository
and Archive, http://aura.antioch.edu/ and OhioLink ETD Center, www.ohiolink.edu/etd
iv
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................................................... i
Dedication ..................................................................................................................................................................... ii
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................................ iii
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................................... iv
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................................. vi
List of Supplemental Files .................................................................................................................................... vii
Preface ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Literature Review: The Social, Economic, and Political Context of Hugo
Chávez’s Leadership ............................................................................................................................................... 20
A Note on the Philosophy of This Literature Review ............................................................................... 23
Social, Economic, and Political Context of Hugo Chávez: 1958–1998 .............................................. 29
Hugo Chávez and the Epic Struggle against Neoliberalism ................................................................... 47
The Role of Race in Latin American and Venezuela ................................................................................. 52
Colonialism ................................................................................................................................................................. 54
Race ............................................................................................................................................................................... 61
Liberation of the Oppressed and Its Influence on Chávez ..................................................................... 76
Battling the United States: When Transformational Leadership Becomes
Leadership on the Line ......................................................................................................................................... 96
v
Research Problem, Purpose, Question, and Design ............................................................................... 106
Research Problem and Question ................................................................................................................... 106
Critical Methodology: Problematics and Pitfalls ..................................................................................... 106
Oral History Tools ................................................................................................................................................ 113
Ethics: Going Beyond the Institutional Review Board ......................................................................... 115
Research Design .................................................................................................................................................... 118
Researcher Positionality ................................................................................................................................... 121
Information Sources—Participants and Documents ............................................................................ 124
Participants and Interviews ............................................................................................................................ 124
Documents on U.S. Actions against the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela ............................. 127
Other Documents on Chávez and the Opposition He Faced .............................................................. 128
Hugo Chávez’s Leadership: Transformational, Parrhesia, Political, and
African-‐Centered Leadership .......................................................................................................................... 130
Hugo Chávez As a Transformational Leader ............................................................................................ 130
Hugo Chávez As Nation Builder ..................................................................................................................... 157
Hugo Chávez As a Feminist .............................................................................................................................. 159
Repression and Charges of Corruption under Hugo Chávez ............................................................. 161
Hugo Chávez, the Pan-‐Africanist .................................................................................................................... 163
Conclusion on Hugo Chávez’s Leadership ................................................................................................. 186
Hugo Chávez—Afro-‐Descendiente and Proud! ....................................................................................... 188
vi
Hugo Chávez’s Identity Reflected in His Leadership ............................................................................ 189
The Role of Race in Latin America and Venezuela ................................................................................. 195
Hugo Chávez: The Liberator ............................................................................................................................ 205
Chávez’s Letter to Africa—Conscious Leadership and Legacy on Race ....................................... 219
Discussion, Conclusions, and Implications of This Research on Practice .................................... 223
Discussion ................................................................................................................................................................ 223
Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................. 224
Implications for Future Research .................................................................................................................. 228
Implications for Future Practice .................................................................................................................... 233
Implications for My Practice ............................................................................................................................ 235
My Thoughts on This Research ...................................................................................................................... 235
Appendix .................................................................................................................................................................. 237
Appendix A: Review of Literature Search Strategy ............................................................................... 238
Appendix B: Participant Information .......................................................................................................... 240
Appendix C: Interview Excerpt Venezuelan Woman #2 ................................................................... 242
Appendix D: The Idea of the Deep State and the Killing of Lumumba .......................................... 245
Appendix E: Legacy of Covert Action Faced by Chávez ....................................................................... 248
Appendix F: Permissions and Exemptions (for Main Body of Dissertation) .............................. 252
Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................................... 257
vii
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Pictures of “Luzia” Reconstruction, Earliest Skull Found in Americas ...... 47
Figure 5.1 Aristóbulo Istúriz Almeida, Governor, State of Anzoátegui ..................... 183
Figure 5.2 Chávez’s Vice-‐President, Elias Jaua, and Russia’s President
Vladimir Putin ......................................................................................................................... 183
viii
List of Supplemental Files These are available as stand-‐alone files: FILE NAME TYPE SIZE
(MB)
Supplemental_1_Cynthia_McKinney_Author_Introduction.mp4 MP4 Video 4.1
Supplemental_2_Interview_Highlights_with_3_participants.mp4 MP4 Video 7.9
S Supplemental_3_Participant_Roundtable_Chávez_International
_Role.mp4
MP4 Video 24.3
Supplemental_4_Wayne_Madsen_Interview_US_Complicity_In
_Coup.MP3
MP3 Audio 5.1
Supplemental_5_Al Giordano_Interview_Unraveling_a_Coup.MP3 MP3 Audio 6.5
Supplemental_6_Dissertation_Supplement_Hugo_Chávez_Legacy
_ _on_Race.pdf
PDF 14.7
1
Preface
Barrett Brown, Barack Obama, and Hugo Chávez: When Telling the Truth Becomes a Crime
Cynthia McKinney January 24, 2015
I am in the process of writing my dissertation on Hugo Chávez. I am in the
final days, actually, of the writing and editing process, and all of a sudden, I find
myself severely constrained by recent events. WikiLeaks is a treasure trove of
information for academic research. Yet, in a library search that I did three days ago,
in preparation for a question from my Dissertation Committee on the status of my
use of WikiLeaks sources, I found that only thirty-‐five articles had been published in
peer-‐reviewed academic journals. In those articles, not a single author had
referenced a single WikiLeaks document, nor did any of those articles provide a URL
for any WikiLeaks document. At the time, I concluded that the academic community
was an extension of The State rather than an extension of The People with a
responsibility to oversee and question the activities, policies, and behavior of The
State.
Then, yesterday, I received a message containing the British Broadcasting
Corporation (BBC) news of the sentencing of Barrett Brown because he posted links
online to the Stratfor e-‐mails that were posted on WikiLeaks.1 Brown did not hack
Stratfor, but as an investigative journalist, reported on the content of the hack and
provided links to his readers.
1. “U.S. Reporter Jailed for Linking to Stolen Data,” BBC News, January 22, 2015, http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-‐30943886.
2
There have been many news articles about the fact and the content of the
Stratfor e-‐mails.2 As well, information pointing to a Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) informant being involved in the hacking of Stratfor, which raises a whole host
of other questions about the continued unlawful conduct of the U.S. government.3
Despite several news articles containing sensational information on the Stratfor
hack, again, a search of peer-‐reviewed journals that I conducted just now revealed
only one article in a computer-‐related journal. Therefore, whether the topic was
WikiLeaks or Stratfor, the academic community is basically missing in action in
examining and investigating this extremely important information.4
A walk back in time shows the same reticence on the part of the academic
community to use controversial, but declassified, government documents in its
research. In searches of the academic literature while I was studying the Counter
Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) of the FBI as a part of my Ph.D. research, I
found, with a few extremely important exceptions, that the most important
COINTELPRO documents remain virtually by-‐passed by the academic community—
even to this date. With this in mind, I really shouldn’t be surprised to see a lack of
the use of WikiLeaks documents, even though the information contained could lead 2. See for example, Eamon Javers, “Stratfor’s Hacked Emails Expose Some Very Tangled Intelligence Gathering,” Business Insider, February 27, 2012, http://www.businessinsider.com/bi-‐stratfor-‐wikileaks-‐hacked-‐emails-‐2012-‐2. 3. See “The Daily Dot Reveals Extent of FBI Involvement in Stratfor Hack,” PRNewswire, June 5, 2014, http://www.prnewswire.com/news-‐releases/the-‐daily-‐dot-‐reveals-‐extent-‐of-‐fbi-‐involvement-‐in-‐stratfor-‐hack-‐261961141.html; and Dell Cameron, “How an FBI Informant Orchestrated the Stratfor Hack,” June 5, 2014, http://www.dailydot.com/politics/hammond-‐sabu-‐fbi-‐stratfor-‐hack/. 4. Regarding the missed opportunities for sound scholarly analysis of the WikiLeaks materials, see Gabriel J. Michael, "Who's Afraid of WikiLeaks? Missed Opportunities in Political Science Research,” Review of Policy Research 32, no. 2 (2015): 175–199, doi:10.1111/ropr.12120.
3
to critical insights on U.S. public policy. Most importantly for those of us who expect
to create change in U.S. domestic police state and foreign military policy, it is the
most controversial of such documents that deserve scrutiny from not only
journalists, but also from the academic community. The operation of the Deep State
is real and must be exposed if the return to constitutional rule and respect of the Bill
of Rights is to be possible. Thus, not only are the young people who broke into an
FBI office and found and publicized the COINTELPRO papers heroes, so too are our
modern day sunshine activists at Cryptome, Narconews, Wayne Madsen Reports,
and WikiLeaks. Whistleblowers like John Kiriakou, Chelsea Manning, Edward
Snowden, and Jeffrey Sterling who are either already in jail or in exile until a new
United States is created by the rest of us are modern-‐day profiles in courage.
Barrett Brown joins them in exposing illegal behaviors for which we, the
people of the United States, share ultimate responsibility. Therefore, we also bear
the responsibility to stop these actions being done in our name with our tax dollars.
Brown’s case even received mention on the popular Netflix series, “House of Cards.”5
On January 23, 2015, he was sentenced to sixty-‐three months for copying and
pasting a link to a publicly available file.
The Obama Administration has compiled a remarkable record of attacks
upon, rather than lauding of, whistleblowers who expose illegal government
activities. Lee Ann McAdoo at Infowars.com called Brown’s sentence an attack on
5. Alex Pearlman, “Who Is Barrett Brown and Why Is ‘House of Cards’ Talking About Him?” BDCwire, February 18, 2014, http://www.bdcwire.com/who-‐is-‐barrett-‐brown-‐and-‐why-‐is-‐house-‐of-‐cards-‐talking-‐about-‐him/.
4
free speech.6 Even a critic of Brown’s says “the charges against Brown give me
shivers as a journalist.”7 In the 1970s, when activists exposed illegal government
activity, two Congressional select committees were established to investigate. The
Otis Pike8 House and Frank Church Senate Committees investigated government
excesses, including assassination plots against foreign leaders and illegal
intelligence activities directed against U.S. citizens. Today, with few notable
exceptions, Congress has capitulated and done nothing to stop to both the egregious
activities exposed by the whistleblowers and the mistreatment of the
whistleblowers. Thus, both the Obama Administration and the elected
Congressional representatives of the people of the United States, sworn to uphold
the Constitution, have made it clear whose side they are on—and it’s not ours or
Barrett Brown’s.
So, now, what does all of this have to do with Hugo Chávez?
I am writing my dissertation on Hugo Chávez. And the released COINTELPRO
and Church Committee Reports only place the opposition to Chávez in historical
context. The very same links that got Barrett Brown into trouble (instead of the
culprits who committed the heinous acts) reveal a contemporaneous attack on the
Bolivarian Revolution that even the CIA World Factbook admits succeeded in
6. Lee Ann McAdoo, “Why You Should Care about Barrett Brown’s Prison Sentence: Feds Moving to Eradicate Free Speech,” January 23, 2015, http://www.infowars.com/ why-‐you-‐should-‐care-‐about-‐barrett-‐browns-‐prison-‐sentence/. 7 .“Who is Barrett Brown…” 8. Otis Pike died on January 20, 2014. For obituary see, “Otis G. Pike, Maverick Congressman Dies at 92,” Washington Post, January 20, 2014, http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/otis-‐g-‐pike-‐maverick-‐ny-‐congressman-‐dies-‐at-‐92/2014/01/20/1e9f6bf2-‐7af2-‐11e3-‐8963-‐b4b654bcc9b2_story.html.
5
drastically cutting Venezuelan poverty; was praised by UNICEF9 for decreasing
infant mortality and childhood hunger; UNESCO10 for the distribution of laptops to
all elementary and high school students; and the United Nations for reducing
income inequality. The attacks on the Bolivarian Revolution included efforts to
undermine leadership inside Venezuela, in the region, and in his international
efforts. For example, championed the Africa South America Summit, and the Obama
Administration undermined ’s efforts to coordinate—culturally, economically, and
militarily—South American countries with their African counterparts. In fact, the
Africa South America Summit was to be held in Libya the year that President Obama
launched the seven-‐month “kinetic activity” that completely destroyed Libya.
President Obama’s action also prevented the institutionalization of military
cooperation between the two continents intended to protect their sovereignty and
independence.
Criminals in positions of authority inside our government use the power of
their positions to cower those of conscience who would act to stop the rampant
crime spree that passes for U.S. domestic and foreign policy. They make examples of
national security whistleblowers at a time when the national security state is
expanding well beyond the benchmarks set by the Church Committee and that the
Senator characterized as “illegal and un-‐American.”11 And among the 535 Members
of Congress today, there is not a Frank Church to be found. And President Obama
9. UNICEF is the United Nations Children’s Fund. 10. UNESCO is the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. 11. The entire Church Committee Reports are available at http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/contents.htm.
6
has proposed legislation to Congress that would make going after investigative
journalists even easier.
As for me, how can I succumb to an academic research regime that, out of
fear of government reprisal, requires, in essence, complicity in the cover-‐up of
criminal or unsavory behavior by governmental actors? Does acquiescence to this
fear have the effect of making academic research that addresses real political
problems as irrelevant to citizens of conscience and action as the so-‐called
mainstream media? Right now, as I embark upon a new way to solve our problems
as a country and community in academia, I feel that an important tool, made
available to the public because of the sacrifices of conscientious whistleblowers, is
being taken away from us. I feel that criminals inside the government are
orchestrating a massive cover-‐up, insuring their impunity.
So, let me get busy deleting links, eliminating text, and undoing images in my
dissertation, ones that would have provided clear evidence to the people of the
United States that their government is actually engaged in behavior too offensive
otherwise to believe. Something important to the health of our country is certainly
being lost and for me, this is a sad recognition, indeed.
7
Introduction
“Chávez, Chávez, Chávez: El no murio, el se multiplico!” was the chant of the
crowd outside the National Assembly building after several days of mourning the
death of the first President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and just before
the newly installed President, Nicolas Maduro, names his Vice President.
This study investigates the legacy of Hugo Chávez as a powerful man who did
not shrink from his African heritage. Yet, it appears that the academic literature has
done just that, namely, avoided discussion of his racial heritage. Searches of
academic bibliographic indexes available in November 2013 yielded few results. For
example, searches of all EBSCO12-‐accessible databases on “Hugo Chávez” and
keywords for “race” (not indicating political campaigns or elections) yielded only a
handful of citations.13
Chávez, in an interview says “As a matter of fact, we have several
motherlands and one of the greatest motherlands of all is no doubt Africa. We love
Africa.” He goes on to say, “Hate against me has a lot to do with racism. Because of
my big mouth, because of my curly hair. And I’m proud to have this mouth and this
hair, because it is African.” Chávez’s racial and ethnic heritage are important aspects
of Chávez’s identity and are overlooked or minimized in academic approaches to his
leadership of Venezuela as is reflected in the paucity of peer-‐reviewed literature
readily available on the subject. Yet, clearly, this aspect of Hugo Chávez was 12. EBSCO is a privately held U.S. multinational corporation that includes EBSCO Information Services, an online platform through which academic databases and bibliographic indexes can be accessed. 13. These keywords included “postcolonialism,” “embedded racism,” “racism,” “race,” “endoracismo,” “critical race theory,” “Latino Critical Theory,” “LatCrit,” and other terms.
8
important to him and was part of his political discourse. Interestingly, Chávez might
have equated race with Africa and not with his Indigenous roots. This holds for his
particular statements about his physical characteristics—his mouth and his hair.
The literature does discuss class issues in relation to Chávez’s appeal to
Venezuelans. From across the political spectrum, from followers of Marx to
advocates of Washington, D.C.’s neoliberal economic formulations amid
globalization, Chávez’s popular appeal was discussed in terms of his class appeal
and the class divide that he is often seen as representing. However, race and
ethnicity were hardly mentioned by these same writers, even when class is
experienced in relation to race in Latin America. For example, Damarys Canache and
Steve Ellner write penetrating articles in peer-‐reviewed journals about Bolivarian
Venezuela under Hugo Chávez. However, neither discusses the issue of race in
Venezuela.14 This confirms the taboo in Venezuela to talk about race and racism.15
For Hugo Chávez to address these issues openly and from his position as a president
was significant and points to his not shying away from taking risks in pursuit of
justice. One exception is the writing of Barry Cannon whose research brings the
racial aspect of Chávez’s identity and that of his supporters into stark relief. Cannon
writes:
14. See Damarys Canache, “From Bullets to Ballots: The Emergence of Popular Support for Hugo Chávez,” Latin American Politics and Society 44, no. 1 (2002): 69–90, doi:10.1111/j.1548-‐2456.2002.tb00197.x; and Steve Ellner, “Social and Political Diversity and the Democratic Road to Change in Venezuela,” Latin American Perspectives 40, no. 3 (2013): 63–82, doi: 10.1177/0094582X13476002. Race is not mentioned even in peer-‐reviewed articles examining Chávez’s base of political support in elections. 15. For a full discussion of “the racial state” of Venezuela, see Victoria Marie Jackson, Race and Politics in Venezuela (N.p.: Victoria Marie Jackson, 2014).
9
The class/race fusion is an essential element needed to explain Chávez’s continuing popularity but most political analysis has paid little attention to the impact of race on Venezuelan politics… Furthermore, and equally importantly, the paper seeks to show that race, or rather, racism, is an essential, but extremely subtle ingredient in opposition discourse rejecting Chávez and those who follow him.16
Jesus Maria Herrera Salas, himself a Venezuelan, exposes the racist
foundations of Chávez’s Venezuelan opposition when he writes that the “upper and
middle classes opposed to the process of change” regularly refer to Chávez
supporters as “ ‘vermin,’ ‘mixed-‐breeds,’ ‘Indians,’ ‘barefoot,’ and ‘rabble.’” He
explains that this is not a new phenomenon and has its roots in Venezuela history.
He writes, “This political economy of racism is nothing more than the historical
continuation of the long process of conquest and slavery of the Indigenous and
Afro-‐Venezuelan populations that began in 1496.”17 Racism occurs everyday in
Venezuela; Herrera Salas calls it the useful “ideology of the slave system and of
Spanish colonial society.”18 This everyday racism is something that
Afro-‐Venezuelans (as well as Venezuela’s Indigenous and the pardos—those who
are mixed with European, Indigenous, and African heritages—know very well.
Research on the practices associated with and the reactions of the targets of
everyday racism become important in the Venezuelan context.19
16. Barry Cannon, “Class/Race Polarisation in Venezuela and the Electoral Success of Hugo Chávez: A Break with the Past or the Song Remains the Same?” Third World Quarterly 29, no. 4 (2008): 732, doi:10.1080/01436590802075020. 17. Jesus Maria Herrera Salas, “Ethnicity and Revolution: The Political Economy of Racism in Venezuela,” Latin American Perspectives 32, no. 2 (2005): 72, doi:10.1177/0094582X04273869. 18. Ibid., 73. 19. For example, see Lauren E. Gulbas, “Embodying Racism: Race, Rhinoplasty, and Self-‐Esteem in Venezuela,” Qualitative Health Research 23, no. 3 (2013): 326–335, doi:10.1177/1049732312468335.
10
“Everyday Racism,” as theorized by Philomena Essed, demonstrates how
racism can become embedded in “routine and taken-‐for-‐granted practices and
procedures in everyday life.”20 Essed’s pioneering work, Understanding Everyday
Racism, sprang from her desire to research the lived experiences of the victims of
racism. She studied how racism operates in the United States and in the Netherlands
among well-‐educated Whites who denied that racism was a factor in their settings.
She wrote that her work “emerged from the need to make visible the lived
experience of racism and, more specifically, to analyze Black perceptions about
racism in everyday life.”21 Essed believes that the knowledge that Black people have
about racism is relevant, including in an academic sense. She writes, “racism is more
than structure and ideology.”22
Because of Venezuela’s long experience with slavery of some 300 years, and
its religious justification, Herrera Salas maintains that the “ideological influence of
the theology of slavery, however, extended well beyond the colonial period, since
the new dominant class of criollos preserved the system of slavery.”23 Herrera Salas
tells of the purposeful immigration policies instituted in Venezuela over the years to
preserve European domination by prohibiting Black immigration. Herrera Salas
calls this Venezuela’s the “whitening project.” He writes that the discourse of the
European Venezuelans was that they were the “civilizing agent,” while the “’inferior 20. Leonardo Partnership, “Everyday Racism at Workplace. How does it feel? (ERAW),” http://www.ch-‐e.eu/en/details-‐european-‐projects/everyday-‐racism-‐at-‐workplace-‐how-‐does-‐it-‐feel-‐eraw.html. 21. Philomena Essed, Understanding Everyday Racism: An Interdisciplinary Theory (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991), 1. 22. Ibid., 2. 23. Criollos, are the White descendants of the Spaniards born in the colony. From Herrera Salas, “Racism,” 75.
11
races,’ the Afro-‐Americans and Indigenous peoples, continued to be the ‘cause’ of the
country’s social ills.”24 This “whitening project” also known as blanqueamiento, was
not Venezuela’s alone, but was common in other Latin American countries, like
Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay which prohibited immigration of people of color.25
The institutionalization of racism as policy in Venezuela sought the forging of
a national identity that did not include either the Indigenous or the Afro-‐Venezuela
populations. Herrera Salas writes that the structures and practices of racism extant
in Venezuela were “initiated by the Spaniards and continued by the republican
criollos in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries [and are] still present in
Venezuela today.”26 Hugo Chávez had lived experiences of racism inside Venezuela.
Herrera Salas boldly writes:
The figure of President Chávez represents an important obstacle to the classism and racism of the Opposition. The fact that he expressly identifies himself as “Indian,” “Black,” or “mixed breed” transforms these supposed insults into positive qualities of which one may feel proud.
When publicly called “rabble” along with his followers, he answers, “Yes, we are the same ‘rabble’ that followed Bolivar.” The names that the President’s followers have given to the Bolivarian Circles [poverty reduction projects organized by the Bolivarian government] include those of Indigenous leaders who resisted the Spanish conquest and Afro-‐Venezuelan rebels such as José Leonardo Chirino and El “Negro” Felipe. It is evident, therefore, that his political discourse and the symbolic and cultural practice of the Bolivarian
24. Herrera Salas, “Racism,” 76. 25. For examples of “whitening” projects in other countries, see Tanya Kateri Hernandez, Racial Subordination in Latin America: The Role of the State, Customary Law, and the New Civil Rights Response (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013). 26. Herrera Salas, “Racism,” 76. See also David Theo Goldberg, “Revealing Alchemies (On Racial Latinamericanization)” in The Threat of Race (Malden, MA: Wiley-‐Blackwell, 2009), 199–244.
12
Revolution have emphasized so-‐called national values, significantly reducing the occurrence of ethnic shame and endoracism27 in the popular sector.28
Hugo Chávez had a working knowledge of how racism functions on a
personal, community, national, and international level. This kind of knowledge is
important when investigating the legacy of Hugo Chávez. This research will make
visible his policies, his statements, and what others said about Chávez on the matter
of race, including, importantly, his “Letter to Africa,” which was written for the
purpose of delivering his message to the Africa South America Summit, just before
he died. Cannon, a scholar Irishman researching in Venezuela, wrote in 2008,
There is a racial subtext to [Chávez’s] support. On the one hand, the poor’s support for Chávez is based on the fact that he is like them: from a poor background and pardo (of mixed Indigenous, African, and European descent)… Conversely, the rejection of Chávez by parts of the middle and most of the upper classes in Venezuela is precisely a rejection of these very qualities: being poor and dark-‐skinned. This rejection is furthermore based on a deeply rooted historical rejection of the Black as being culturally and socially inferior to the White. . . . This association of the Black with backwardness remains strong in Venezuela, especially in terms of media depiction of the poor. Dark skin… is still associated with poverty and, the darker the skin, the more likely that the person will belong to the poorer sections of society.29
The above quote summarizes the importance of studying the meaning and
role of race in relation to Chávez’ leadership. What kind of leader was Chávez; what
did he do with this specialized knowledge of how race works locally and globally,
and, specifically, how African-‐descendant racial identity works in the South
American setting? This study will look at his leadership and how he used his power
combined with this knowledge to affect the lives of people close to him and far away 27. Endoracism or endoracismo are respectively English and Spanish terms for internalized racism. 28. Herrera Salas, “Racism,” 86. 29. Cannon, “Class/Race Polarisation,” 734.
13
from him. Chávez was significant for his direct impact on the lives of people of
Venezuela. But Chávez’s reach extended far beyond the boundaries of Venezuela, as
we will see. One publication printed an article that called him “The Everywhere
Man” with the subhead, “Oil money and an expansive ideology mean that Chávez’s
influence knows no bounds.”30 From the left, Ellner reviewed a book entitled
“Venezuela’s Petro-‐Diplomacy” and from the right Thomas Friedman critiqued
Chávez’s foreign policy in the journal, Foreign Policy.31 Because he celebrated his
pardo identity, which was an unusual thing to do in his country, Indigenous people
and Black people inside Venezuela and around the world paid attention to him.32
Even in Latin American countries that celebrate a mixed-‐race identity, the political
and economic power is still White dominated. This aspect of state policy and racial
practice will be explored further in the second and fourth chapters. Chávez’s
promotion of the interests of marginalized and oppressed people of color, combined
with his global reach, put him at the leading edge of what former World Bank
President James Wolfensohn, in speaking to a group of graduate students at
Stanford University, called a “tectonic shift,” one that is “turning the world on its
head.” Chávez, from this vantage is one part of the forces putting to an end
30. Katherine Yester, “The Everywhere Man,” Foreign Policy, (October 19, 2009): 38, http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/19/the-‐everywhere-‐man/. 31. See Steve Ellner, Review of Venezuela’s Petro-‐Diplomacy: Hugo Chávez’s Foreign Policy, by Ralph S. Clem and Anthony P. Maingot, Journal of Latin American Studies 44, no. 1 (2012): 202–204, doi:10.1017/S0022216X11001349; and Thomas Friedman, “The First Law of Petropolitics,” Foreign Policy 154 (May/June 2006): 28–36, http://nghiencuuquocte.net/wp-‐content/uploads/2013/09/The-‐First-‐Law-‐of-‐Petropolitics-‐friedman.pdf 32. Kateri Hernandez in Racial Subordination and Goldberg in “Revealing Alchemies,” show the role of mestizaje in maintaining White political and economic domination in Brazil and throughout Latin America.
14
European global domination and that include the economic and political rise of
China and India, and their alliance with the projected two billion people on the
African continent by the year 2050. Wolfensohn states in his speech:
It was a balance where you knew you were the rich countries, the powerful countries; and all the organs of running the world were designed to accommodate that fact. . . . The Western countries were able to stay ahead firstly because of manufacturing. Well, that got taken out and manufacturing moved to Asia. The second thing that happened after that was that in service industries, it moved to the Western countries and now that’s been taken out, in terms of Asian dominance in the service areas. And thirdly, was in technology, we were able to stay ahead… the technological advance has now shifted as well. So, the challenge for our country is, what the hell is it that’s going to be left for us, if Asia is eating our lunch and dinner in terms of the things that we used to be able to do. And it’s not just the United States. It is truly that group of the so-‐called billion plus that were previously the dominant factor who had 80% of the world’s GDP… If it were me, today, the number one thing that I would be thinking about … is that the 80–20 rule which I had comfortably in my hip pocket is going to be a 35-‐65 rule and that puts a challenge of dramatic proportions to anybody who is in a business school today. 33
What is the appropriate leadership response when you know that the system
as it is currently designed contributes to your oppression? According to Ray
Winbush, one can side with the initiators of the oppression and become a
collaborator, one can become a victim of such oppression, or one can resist
becoming either a collaborator or a victim.34
Not only is the legacy of Hugo Chávez important for the reasons already
mentioned, his leadership is also deeply important to me. As a person of African
heritage who grew up in the Southern part of the United States, I know what it is like
33. “Former World Bank President: Big Shift Coming,” YouTube video, 51:21, from an address by James D. Wolfensohn to Stanford University Graduate School of Business, posted by to Stanford University Graduate School of Business, January 29, 2010, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a0zhc1y_Ns&feature=youtu.be. 34. Ray Winbush, interview with the author, November 30, 2013.
15
to know racism. Because of the experiences of my great-‐grandmother who could
“pass” for White but refused to do so, I know what rejection of White privilege and,
instead, insistence on identity, pride and dignity mean to individuals from
oppressed groups. I ask myself why the legacy of Hugo Chávez is important—yes,
his challenge to the Washington Consensus of neoliberal economics is central; but
what is even more important to me is his assertion of dignity for people of African
descent. Hugo Chávez had a certain kind of knowledge that I, too, share. It makes us
intimates, in a way. And how he acted on that knowledge can be instructive to me
(and others): what to do and what not to do as one attempts to lead change.
According to Essed, “knowledge of racism must be defined as a special form
of political knowledge” worthy of academic inquiry.35 Indeed, for me, Hugo Chávez’s
challenge to the Washington Consensus36 also amounts to an assertion of pride and
dignity for all who are oppressed under today’s edifice of global domination,
inherited by the descendants of the colonizers and the colonized.
Second order change (transformational change), according to Amir Levy, is
the kind of change that goes all the way to the core of an individual, organization, or
even an entire country. Levy writes that second order change involves, “changes in
the core processes, in mission and purpose, in culture, and in organizational world
view or paradigm.” Levy adds that, “the less visible the dimension, the deeper the
35. Essed, Understanding Everyday Racism, 9. 36. “Washington Consensus” denotes the set of economic policies promoted by multilateral institutions based in Washington, D.C. (the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank) and also subscribed to by the U.S. Treasury. These policy prescriptions were almost exclusively enforced on Third World (non-‐European) lesser-‐developed countries (LDC’s). It connotes, more broadly, these economic policies and the U.S. foreign policy that undergirds them.
16
change and the greater the possibility that the change will be irreversible.”37 I
believe that Hugo Chávez represented leadership that attempted to inaugurate
second order change, not only in Venezuela, but also across the world—those who
share experiences of marginalization and who try to problematize repression and
marginalization. Leadership that successfully addresses and changes that 80-‐20,
Washington Consensus paradigm will, as Wolfensohn told the Stanford Business
School, “turn the world on its head.”38
Thus, considering the factor of race, the basic question that this research
seeks to answer is, “What is the racial legacy of Hugo Chávez?” When faced with the
knowledge of how a system of oppression operates, one can resist, one can be a
bystander, or one can collaborate.39 Given his challenge to the neoliberal40 economic
agenda, known as the Washington Consensus, given his challenge to everyday
racism that masks institutional structures and personal conventions that serve to
embed power and privilege in the hands of an identifiable few, how did Hugo Chávez
speak his truth to power? By speaking to and for the marginalized? By mobilizing
the marginalized for ideas like liberty and dignity? By inspiring new leaders among
the marginalized?
37. Amir Levy, “Second-‐Order Planned Change: Definition and Conceptualization,” Organizational Dynamics 15, no.1, (1986): 20, doi:10.1016/0090-‐2616(86)90022-‐7. 38. Wolfensohn, “Former World Bank President: Big Shift.” 39. See Kristina Thalhammer et al., Courageous Resistance: The Power of Ordinary People (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007). 40. “Neoliberalism” will be discussed later in this chapter. It is the economic policy that characterizes the Washington Consensus of today: privatization, deregulation, and free market capitalism that is said to have overtaken the state and its responsibilities to its citizens.
17
Tommy Curry decries the exclusion of Black sources in research on racism.
He claims that the “exclusion of Black thinkers as sources of philosophical insight on
racism” is “hegemonic.” He writes that this tradition “perpetuate[s] the under
specialization of race theory.” He concludes that “specific practices in the discipline
of philosophy continue to bar Blacks and non-‐European descended peoples from
describing, addressing, and producing scholarship from their own culturally
relevant experience.”41 Curry refers to the current practices as a type of “Ideo-‐Racial
Apartheid” and calls for a “rigorous engagement with race theory.”42 Curry’s call has
been heard. This research will be distinguished in its subject matter, “The Legacy of
Hugo Chávez on Race,” but also in how that legacy will be approached and whose
opinions and ideas will be solicited and included. It must be kept in mind, however,
that a Black view might represent internalized racism while a White critical view
might well respect the dignity of people of color.
The second chapter will involve a discussion of the philosophy that guided
the literature review. While taking a figurative “snapshot” of the extant literature in
general and specific items, an explanation of why articles were or were not selected
for inclusion in the dissertation will also be covered.
Because this research also involves the issue of race, race theory and critical
race theory will be important search topics. An interesting aspect of the various
search strategies utilized in order to obtain information on the extant literature on
the subject, is its fragmentation or balkanization. In order to produce a 41. Tommy Curry, “Concerning the Underspecialization of Race Theory in American Philosophy: How the Exclusion of Black Sources Affects the Field,” The Pluralist 5, no. 1 (2010): 45, doi:10.1353/plu.0.0042. 42. Ibid., 54.
18
comprehensive snapshot of the literature that addresses race as a standalone
subject term, relevant literature was found under eighteen different headings.43
There is also a huge body of literature on the intersectionality of race and other
factors, such as class, gender, and other structural factors.
Using deep search methods, close to three hundred relevant citations were
found, but zero emerged when several of these terms were combined with the name
“Hugo Chávez.”
The third chapter will describe the research methodology and the rationale
for the chosen methods. It will include as well a rationale for selection of
participants, U.S. Government documents, Venezuelan Government documents,
Chávez statements, as well as official Chávez policies pursued in the area of race.
The purpose of this research positions it clearly inside the realm of critical
theory in that it seeks to “be simultaneously explanatory, practical, and
normative.”44 This research will also seek to tell an interesting story. But this is not
my story. The story will belong to the people who are interviewed and whose voices
will be heard as authentically as they deliver their experiences and opinions. This
story will belong also to the less animated documents of history reflecting official
government actions. Most importantly, this story will belong to Hugo Chávez and the
people he touched. I interviewed people who worked with him as well as people
who knew of him and his work. It is clear that Hugo Chávez remains a controversial
figure and some in the public sphere hesitated to go on the record with their 43. Appendix A contains results of the eighteen literature search terms as paired with the name “Hugo Chávez.” 44. Seppo Poutanen and Anne Kovalainen, “Critical Theory” in Encyclopedia of Case Study Research, ed. Albert J. Mills et al. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2010), 264.
19
assessment of the Chávez legacy. This provides a limitation on the study as some
who were asked to participate refused; a profile of those who agreed, as well as of
those who declined to be interviewed might be a useful part of our analysis.
This research studies what Hugo Chávez did on the issue of color as a leader
of color, what his legacy is, and why his acknowledgment and pride in his African
heritage is an important flower in the centerpiece of his legacy. Also, what does his
kind of leadership mean for the future? Was his the kind of leadership that other
people of color should emulate or avoid? What are the characteristics shared by the
leaders mentioned in Hugo Chávez’s “A Letter to Africa”? I intend to explore these
types of questions and answers that will arise during the course of this research.
Finally, the formulation here is not something that I had in mind when I
started this project; it has emerged, primarily, as a result of working on a video 45 of
Chávez’s “A Letter to Africa,” as I realized that many of the names invoked therein
were leaders on the world stage who did not live long enough to see the results of
their work. This, in turn, led me to contemplate the nature of this kind of leadership,
why it stalks danger, and what could be done to protect the lives of such leaders.
The process of oppression can be never-‐ending if the people are not able to sustain
transformational, Parrhesiastic46 leadership that can put them on the road to
liberation.
45. “Hugo Chávez Letter to Africa,” YouTube video, 5:12, posted by Cynthia McKinney, July 8, 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChwbB_zwQrw. 46. Parrhesia, which is discussed in the second chapter, is leadership that takes freedom of speech as an obligation, to tell the truth to power, even at risk of losing that freedom.
20
Literature Review: The Social, Economic, and Political Context Of Hugo Chávez’s Leadership
The Genesis of This Research Project
I have been fascinated with Hugo Chávez ever since I attended a town hall
meeting of his that lasted well into the wee hours of the next morning. People from
all over Caracas, and probably all over Venezuela, had lined up to have a one-‐on-‐one
session with their President. It was exactly the same procedure that I had done
during my District Days while I was in Congress: I would set up shop with the
Congressional Staff at a pre-‐publicized location in the U.S. House District that I
represented and stay there all day (and all night if it took it) to see the Constituents
that brought their issues and problems to me. During this process, I had many all
day/all night sessions with my Constituents—but a President? Well, that is exactly
what happened. President Chávez was having a District Day! And I sat there with
him—in the audience, among the people—until about 1:00 a.m. until the last
Venezuelan had been served. Thus began my fascination with the leadership of Hugo
Chávez.
What struck me was the service. The dedication. The commitment. The trust.
The love. What else could explain this kind of openness? I know how my District
Days made my constituents and me feel; there must have been that same kind of
connection between the people in the room and their President.
And then, I asked myself, “When was the last time the people of the United
States had a District Day with their President?”
I was further convinced of the strong connection between Chávez and the
people, el pueblo, when I traveled to Venezuela during the mourning for its
21
President who had died of cancer on March 5, 2013. I have often been interviewed
on Pacifica Radio Stations about the feelings that gushed throughout my body as I
stood in the midst of one of the largest crowds I have ever been in. In no way could I
experience, even vicariously, the sense of loss of the Venezuelan people. I did,
however, have a sense of loss, myself. This is how I had come to perceive and
experience Hugo Chávez, because gone was a champion of the poor who even
offered heating oil to the poor in the United States.47 Gone was a leader in every
sense of that word, who took on the challenges that the unwanted face everyday,
because he had faced and overcome those challenges, too. And even more than all of
that, Hugo Chávez addressed the all-‐important identity question that has plagued
those of us who have been colonized in one way or another for the past five hundred
years of European domination of the New World (the Western Hemisphere that was
new to them) and since that time, the entire world.
In my view, Hugo Chávez sought justice for the neglected people of
Venezuela, especially the Indigenous who owned the land that was conquered by the
Europeans, and the descendants of the enslaved Africans, transported to the New
World to provide the labor; thereby, the Indigenous throughout the Americas and
the Africans helped to build the magnificent city centers in Europe. The descendants
of the Europeans who settled in the New World protect their privileged positions up
to today. It was this entrenched power, that stemmed from European domination,
that was also based on race, that Hugo Chávez challenged. The Indigenous and
47. Ian James, “Chávez Boosts Heating Oil Program for U.S. Poor; Goes After Bush Again,” Washington Post, September 21, 2006, http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-‐dyn/content/article/2006/09/21/AR2006092101163.html.
22
African descendants and those who were mixed—a combination of the two, were
condemned to lives of indigence and ignominy. Those who were White, descendants
of the European settlers, were transformed into an oligarchy for whom the economy
and the Venezuelan polity were constructed. Hugo Chávez challenged that power
and injustice inside Venezuela and he challenged what European domination means
for the rest of the world. He sought to correct the global structural injustice based on
race that resulted from colonialism, neocolonialism, globalization, and its
incarnation today—neoliberalism.48
Hugo Chávez’s message was also one of liberty and sovereignty for peoples
and countries. This would necessitate the transformation of today’s system of
injustice into a system where everyone had rights that were to be respected,
including Mother Earth. Therefore Chávez built new institutions that reflected these
values.
For the purpose of this dissertation, most importantly and probably
foundational to all that has been mentioned above is identity. Hugo Chávez
championed his own identity and his African roots. He spoke proudly of his African
heritage and of “Mother Africa.” He was the first Latin American president to do so.
Because of this appreciation for the multifaceted robustness of the leadership of
Hugo Chávez, I decided to study his legacy with a special emphasis on race. I
recognize that this puts me in a peculiar situation: I must acknowledge that I am
working from a position of bias. I will balance this by putting Chávez’s leadership
48. Neoliberalism, which will be described in detail below, is a set of government policies that favor laissez-‐faire economic activity designed to allow market forces to shape public policy.
23
and race in the broader context of Latin American, leadership models in Latin
America and Africa, and the relationship between Chávez and the United States. My
challenge will be to provide a portrait of Chávez that is new—his advocacy of
liberation with a lens on race—without being uncritical of his leadership in general
and relevant critiques of any Presidential leader.
Researching the legacy of Hugo Chávez’s leadership with a lens on race will
require an examination of the literature along the following major themes: Social,
Economic, and Political Context of the Hugo Chávez Legacy; The Role of Race in
Latin America and Venezuela; Latin American Liberation of the Oppressed and Its
Influence on Chávez; and Political Leadership: Leading Powerful Change.
A Note on the Philosophy of This Literature Review
This research examines the legacy of Hugo Chávez. It explores that legacy
with a focus on an understudied aspect of his identity: race. However, should the
literature considered in this research be exhaustive of the literature on the four
major themes identified or should it be more narrowly tailored just to that pertinent
to considerations of Hugo Chávez’s legacy on race? Joseph Maxwell and David Boote
and Penny Beile have definite ideas on how a dissertation researcher should
proceed.
Joseph Maxwell believes that a dissertation literature review should be
guided by the needs of the research being done in the dissertation. He makes the
distinction between scholarly literature reviews that serve the purpose of informing
on the state of the literature in any given field, which one would then expect to be
expansive in nature, and literature that is undertaken for the purposes of
24
performing research. He writes that a dissertation literature review is “primarily” a
review “for rather than of research.”49 Accordingly, the dissertation literature review
need not be an exhaustive listing of the literature that is available in any given
subject, but should focus on the appropriate background for a research project.
Maxwell indicates that narrow tailoring is called for in a dissertation literature
review and writes, “Relevance, rather than thoroughness or comprehensiveness, is
the essential characteristic of literature reviews in most scholarly work.”50 Maxwell
suggests that the literature review of a dissertation be treated as a “conceptual
framework” for a research project. Boote and Beile have a different idea.
Boote and Beile51 believe that the dissertation is one of the “key cultural
artifacts of academic learning” and that earning a doctorate requires a more
expansive, maximalist approach on dissertation literature reviews. They conclude
that the responsibility belongs to the student to capture the existing literature
successfully and to decide thoughtfully and purposefully what literature to include
in the review. They also write that the literature reviewed should be up to date.
Therefore, this dissertation literature review will seek to use the Maxwell standard
of relevance rather than expansiveness and the Boote and Beile standard of
up-‐to-‐date-‐ness for all literature other than that defined as foundational to each of
our themes. Unless indicated otherwise, all literature reviewed will be from
49. Joseph A. Maxwell, “Literature Reviews of, and for Educational Research: A Commentary on Boote and Beile’s ‘Scholars before Researchers,’ ” Educational Researcher 35, no. 9 (2006): 28, doi:10.3102/0013189X035009028. 50. Ibid., 29. 51. David N. Boote and Penny Beile, “Scholars before Researchers: On the Centrality of the Dissertation Literature Review in Research Preparation,” Educational Researcher 34, no. 3 (2005): 7–9, doi:10.3102/0013189X034006003.
25
peer-‐reviewed journals and other scholarly studies. If dissertation literature
reviews are like the background music that sets the tempo and the mood for a
popular song, then we should probably set this one to a punta beat that elides to
salsa.52
The Important Literature: Leadership, Politics, and Race
In order to undertake this research, I intend to look at the literature that I
believe is critical toward developing an understanding of the type of leadership and
legacy that Hugo Chávez provided on the matter of race. Therefore, literature on
leadership, politics, and race is important. As a method of capturing the full extent of
the literature on race, I found it necessary to search on eighteen terms that included:
“ethnic diversity,” “social justice,” “multiculturalism,” “Negritude,” “embedded
racism,” “subaltern,” “other,” “Latino Critical Theory,” and more. When each of these
eighteen terms was combined with “Hugo Chávez,” the dearth of research on Chávez
through this lens became clear.53
In addition, it is important to contextualize the discussion specifically around
the factors that led to Hugo Chávez’s rise in Venezuela and then, once on the
national scene, how his discourse and his policies catapulted him to international
prominence. I believe that he received such prominence because of the uniqueness
of his approach to race in the Venezuelan and Latin American settings. Hugo Chávez 52. Punta is a traditional form of music of Africans transported to the Americas in the slave trade; Salsa is a combination of the influences of African rhythms and the Spanish language, especially Cuban and Puerto Rican influences. Many examples of punta can be readily found on YouTube, for example, see (and hear) “Dancing Punta – Music Video – Nuru,” YouTube video, 5:14, posted by “goastafa”, September 14, 2007, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynVPIod9lE8. 53. See Appendix A for all eighteen of the search terms and the number of citations produced when Hugo Chávez was added with each of the search terms.
26
transformed into someone who was not shy about talking about a despised race, as
his own racial identity. This made him unique. In fact, Hugo Chávez was the first
South American President to proclaim—and proudly at that—his African heritage.
Therefore, because of his willingness to accept whatever the baggage was that came
along with being non-‐European in the Venezuelan and Latin American settings,
Chávez was ultimately able to speak to a population in a way that affirmed their own
identity. As a result, literature that deals with the inner workings of domination and
oppression based on race is important.
Most who recognize the name of Hugo Chávez recognize it around his
struggle against domination of Venezuela by the United States and its neoliberal
agenda, viewed by some as merely an extension of colonialism that was
accompanied by genocide of the Indigenous and enslavement of trafficked Africans:
neocolonialism; and globalization. By extension, those who became a part of the
attentive public looking on while Hugo Chávez led, were especially, but not solely,
non-‐European people of the region and people of African descent everywhere.
Consequently, literature that discusses race in conjunction with each of these
periods (neoliberal, globalization, neocolonial, colonial) is also important. I will
begin with a discussion of neoliberalism and its effects because that is the most
recent incarnation of what some would say has been the linear pursuit of
European-‐style domination by the United States toward non-‐European countries in
its political and economic policies.
After Chávez became the leader that many of us think we know, the issue
moves directly to the question of what kind of leader he actually was. In this
27
exploration of the leadership and legacy of Hugo Chávez on the issue of race,
literature on leadership and liberation will be included in this review. Specifically, I
will review literature situating Hugo Chávez in the racially-‐charged setting of Latin
America at a time of European domination where the protagonist takes on the
leadership of the United States in its policy prescriptions, for and in the
non-‐European world. This dissertation constructs a particular version of Chávez’s
leadership based on its sources, their transparency, and the reader’s ability to
critique that.
Finally, I would also like to consider the role of those who benefit from unjust
structures and, yet, who want to change these by initiating powerful change. In the
end, that is exactly what Hugo Chávez was trying to do. He was leading powerful
change through his political leadership. I believe that the leadership of Hugo Chávez
on race demonstrates what is possible when one becomes “free” and liberated of the
burden that racial domination can produce for many people of color.
Structure of This Chapter
Having described the philosophy of the literature review, this chapter is
divided into four sections. The first section sets out the context of Hugo Chavez’s
legacy. It is in this section, “Social, Economic, and Political Context of Hugo Chávez’s
Legacy,” that I will discuss the factors that led to Chávez’s rise inside of Venezuela:
The Punto Fijo Pact, by which relations were negotiated among Venezuela’s political
parties; the Caracazo that closed the casket on the Punto Fijo Pact; and Hugo
Chávez’s failed 1992 coup attempt against Venezuela’s compliant, neoliberal state
then led by President Carlos Andrés Perez. This section ends in 1998, when Chávez
28
is elected President. The authors who have been explored in this section write
specifically about these aspects of Venezuela and Hugo Chávez’s rise to power. This
section explains what it is that Hugo Chávez felt compelled to fight.
The section entitled, “Role of Race in Latin America and Venezuela,” covers
the literature on colonialism, Eurocentrism, and racism. I believe, as the literature
also reflects, that the conquest of the peoples of The Americas, when combined with
the treatment of trafficked Africans during (and after) the Trans-‐Atlantic Slave
Trade, constitute a historical continuity in the creation of the political world—its
structures, institutions, norms, and assumptions—that lives on with us today. It is
explicitly my contention that the various iterations of the Washington Consensus
stem from this time, assuring the continued global domination of the former
colonizers over those who were colonized. It is against this set of policies,
structures, and assumptions that Hugo Chávez struggled. And the second chapter
also examines the spawn of colonialism in Hugo Chávez’s context. It is this section
that provides background on the racial context within which Chávez was steeped.
The authors included in this Section begin at the beginning—that is with colonialism
and its impact on both the colonizer and the colonized. The one thing that the
authors have in common is their view of colonialism and its power in the non-‐
European setting: a power that remains until today. This section describes who it is
that Hugo Chávez felt compelled to fight, what Chávez would have had to overcome
in order to speak directly to them and then, ultimately, to fight them.
The third section of this chapter is entitled “Liberation of the Oppressed and
Its Influence on Chávez.” Here, I will situate Chávez in the midst of practitioners and
29
theorists of resistance who are instructive on how the fight for liberation is to be
waged. Chávez situated himself in the tradition of Simon Bolivar. However, other
experiences are instructive, and fit the Venezuelan situation better than the rigid
Marxist prescription for revolution in Europe. I believe these experiences warrant a
closer look when in search of guidance for an examination of Hugo Chávez’s
leadership and legacy on race. Therefore, it is here that some practitioners of
resistance who also have a relationship with Chávez will be discussed. Theorists
ruminating on old and new ways of resisting, especially ones manifesting now in
Latin America, will also be discussed.
The final section is “Battling the : When Transformational Leadership
Becomes Leadership on the Line.” There I will explore leadership models and real
life Latin American leadership examples that situate Hugo Chávez’s struggle. It is
here that, in particular, examples of Leadership on the Line, Fidel Castro and Omar
Torrijos, are explored. Parrhesia, a unique type of leadership is also discussed. It is
in this section, also, that the dangers in this kind of leadership will be discussed,
because one cannot lead powerful political change, as Hugo Chávez did, without also
courting danger, risk, and sometimes, even death. Finally, the Politics of the Un will
be discussed in connection with the creation of the moment when revolutionary or
transformational change is possible.
Social, Economic, and Political Context of Hugo Chávez: 1958–1998
The Punto Fijo Pact
Hugo Chávez rose to international prominence because of the unique
circumstances that existed in Venezuela in 1998, the year of his election to
30
Venezuela’s Presidency. George Ciccariello-‐Maher writes in We Created Chávez,54
that the Bolivarian Revolution came about as a result of the vibrancy of the social
movements in Venezuela that preceded Chávez’s eruption onto the national scene.
Those social movements included armed struggle that resulted in a guerrilla
movement whose aim was freedom from the dictatorship of the Venezuelan
oligarchy in its various political forms. Venezuela had been a military dictatorship
for most of the years between1830 and 1958. In 1958, Venezuela’s three
mainstream political parties, Accion Democratica (Democratic Action), Partido Social
Cristiano (COPEI), and Union Republicana Democratica (URD) came together in a
power-‐sharing agreement, known as the Punto Fijo Pact, that negotiated the limits
of change in the newly democratic Venezuelan polity.55 This agreement included
freedom to vote, depersonalization of debate, the maintenance of a united front, and
the elimination of inter-‐party violence. This agreement guaranteed that the victor of
elections would have the right to govern and that they all would defend each other
in the event of a coup. The three parties also committed themselves to strengthening
democratic processes in Venezuela. Also, each party agreed to select only one
presidential candidate and to establish an inter-‐party committee to oversee
compliance of the Pact, which was signed on October 31, 1958.
In reality, this arrangement allowed Accion Democratica (AD) to gain the
presidency five times and COPEI three times and excluded both the far right and the
54. George Ciccariello-‐Maher, We Created Chávez (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2013). 55. For full text of pact see “Pacto de Punto Fijo,” http://analitica.com/opinion/opinion-‐nacional/pacto-‐de-‐punto-‐fijo/.
31
far left.56 The URD eventually left the Pact because of a dispute over its support for
the Cuban Revolution and the government’s crackdown on students who supported
its position. The Venezuelan military was sent onto the campus of Central
Venezuelan University and this caused the URD members who were in the Cabinet
of the National Unity Government to resign. The Venezuelan Communist Party (PCV)
and the Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR), not party to the Punto Fijo Pact, were
banned as political parties soon after the Pact took force. Puntofijismo also marked
the idea of classless, non-‐polarizing politics, according to Andres Serbin, writing in
2010.57 He says, however, that polarization in Venezuelan society began in the
decade of the 1980s as the economy deteriorated and continued thereafter. Punto
Fijo proved to be nothing more than a kind of Concert of the Elites between AD and
COPEI. Webber adds that the Punto Fijo Pact caused the reformist AD to moderate
those inclinations.58 Eventually even organized labor collaborated with
Puntofijoismo and “capitulated”59 to neoliberalism in the 1990s. This marked the
beginning of the decline in relevance to the people of Venezuela of the main political
parties.
Philip Klitzberger, focuses on the media wars that engulfed the new Left
Presidents of South America: Chávez, Morales (Bolivia), Kirchner (Argentina), and
Correa (Ecuador). He writes that the media also played a role in the decline of the
56. Ciccariello-‐Maher, We Created, 25. 57. Andres Serbin, Chávez, Venezuela y la Reconfiguracion Politica de America Latina y El Caribe (Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI, 2010), 35. 58. Jeffery R. Webber, “Venezuela under Chávez: The Prospects and Limitations of Twenty-‐First Century Socialism, 1999–2009,” Socialist Studies, 6, no. 1 (2010): 11–44, https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/sss/article/view/23673/17557. 59. Ibid., 27.
32
relevance of the Punto Fijo political parties because of its focus on the corruption of
Venezuela’s political class.60 And Barry Cannon writes that there was an
undercurrent of resentment from the Left that eventually erupted. The system of
Puntafijoismo had lent the appearance of consensus to a system that did not
accurately reflect what was happening just beneath the surface. Mass alienation,
writes Cannon, was the result of the government’s neoliberal turn.61
Meanwhile, the success of the Cuban Revolution in 1959 had inspired an
armed struggle in Venezuela that was buoyed with optimism. Fidel Castro had
managed to overthrow the -‐backed administration of Fulgencio Batista in Cuba;
Venezuelans thought they would be able to do the same. Reality crashed that
optimism as the effort was defeated. However, the state began to suppress the
post-‐Cuban armed struggle in Venezuela. It was this repression that secured the
support of Hugo Chávez for Revolution. At the same the Leftists realized that they
needed the military if their plans for revolutionary change in Venezuela were ever
going to be effective.
Chávez had joined the military to escape his life on the plains of Venezuela.
While in the military, he rose quickly through the ranks. He studied political science
and military strategy. He had been well steeped in political ideas through his
friendships and associations at home in Barinas. In Caracas, at the military school,
he learned about the nationalist military leaders of Panama, General Omar Torrijos,
60. Philip Kitzberger, “Giro a la Izquierda, Populismo y Activismo Gubernamental en la Esfera Publica Mediatica in America Latina,” in Poder Politico Y Medios de Communicacion: De la Representacion Politica al Reality Show, ed. Bernardo Sorj (Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI, 2010), 61–100. 61. Cannon, “Class/Race Polarisation,” 739.
33
and of Peru, General Juan Velasco Alvarado. After seeing the overthrow of Allende in
Chile and the installation of Pinochet there, he wrote, “With Torrijos, I became a
Torrijist. With Velasco, I became a Velasquist. And with Pinochet, I became an
anti-‐Pinochetist.”62
In the military, Chávez became head of a communications unit that allowed
him to have a regular radio show and a column in El Espacio, a newspaper. Chávez
was an avid reader and one of the books that he read while in the barracks was The
Green Book, written by fellow military man, Libyan Colonel Muammar Qaddafi. He
also read Ché Guevara. According to Cristina Marcano and Alberto Berrera Tyszka
writing in Hugo Chávez: The Definitive Biography of Venezuela’s Controversial
President, Chávez also saw the impact of the guerrilla struggle that pitted peasant
guerrillas against peasant soldiers. Chávez confronted himself and asked himself
important questions that would shape his future. Chávez began to work for
revolution in Venezuela while inside the military. His brother, Adan Chávez Frias,
became important connective tissue between the leftists outside the military and a
nucleus of officers and soldiers inside the military.
Chávez’s brother, Adan, was an activist with the banned MIR. Although a
Physics Professor he trained at the University of the Andes, was steeped in the
politics of liberation, including the armed struggle. Even though Hugo Chávez chose
the military, through his brother, he remained in contact with the guerillas and
learned that there were members of the Venezuelan military who were working
62. Quoted in Cristina Marcano and Alberto Berrera Tyszka, Hugo Chávez: The Definitive Biography of Venezuela’s Controversial President (New York: Random House, 2006), 36-‐37.
34
with the leftists in order to create a movement comprised of both civilian and
military elements that one day would create a revolution in Venezuela. Marcano and
Barrera Tyszka write that Chávez’s brother, Adan, had a powerful effect on Chávez’s
political thinking.63
With the leftist political parties banned in Venezuela and the failure of its
armed struggle, those who opposed the oligarchic political and economic structure
of Venezuelan society had few options left to them. At the same time, the Venezuelan
economy was failing, too. The Punto Fijo Pact finally failed in 1989 when the poor
descended from the hills that housed their barrios and erupted onto the streets of
Caracas. With the economy failing, the Venezuelan government sought loans from
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that required its standard structural
adjustment prescriptions of devaluation of Venezuela’s currency, privatization of
state-‐owned companies, and the elimination of subsidies on essential items,
including gasoline. These policies are known today as neoliberalism. On February
27, 1989, the people spoke and deflated any appearance of consensus that might
have been miscalculated with the IMF’s economic agenda. The protests lasted for
one week. While the Leftists had been plotting revolution for years, the people on
the streets were about to make one. On March 3, 1989, Venezuelan President Carlos
Andres Perez received a phone call from U.S. President Bush to ensure that
Venezuela would not turn back on its neoliberal commitments—even at the expense
63. Marcano and Barrera Tyszka, Hugo Chávez, 46.
35
of the people and Perez’s Presidency.64 Basically, President Bush offered no help,
just a word of encouragement to stick with the necessary neoliberal agenda that the
IMF65 had prescribed for Venezuela. Henry Dietz and David Myers write that by
1988, Venezuela had experienced total party system collapse that lasted until
2000.66
Leading up to the Caracazo, so-‐called because it was the rebellion that dealt a
knock-‐out blow to Caracas politics, Venezuela’s economy was in a tailspin. Indeed,
the decade of the 1980s has been described as an economic “disaster” for Venezuela
with “growth” estimated at minus 1.9%.67 As the economy worsened, social
movements became more active. Protest movements were marked by work
stoppages, protest marches, student actions, and occupations.68 Puntofijismo, in its
death throes, was proven to be what many on the Left suspected: it was a political
agreement to exclude radicalism, but also to exclude any discussion of
dissatisfaction or dissent from the apparent consensus between the rich and the
64. George H.W. Bush to Carlos Andres Perez, March 3, 1989, “Memorandum of Conversation,” http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/pdfs/memcons_telcons /1989-‐03-‐03-‐-‐Perez.pdf. 65. The United States is the largest shareholder in the IMF. 66. Henry A. Dietz and David J. Myers, “From Thaw to Deluge: Party System Collapse in Venezuela and Peru,” Latin American Politics and Society 49, no. 2 (2007): 59–86, doi:10.1111/j.1548-2456.2007.tb00407.x. 67. In fact the period from the 1960s to the 1990s could be considered an economic disaster for Venezuela with negative “growth” throughout the period. See Hugo J. Faria, “Hugo Chávez Against the Backdrop of Venezuelan Economic and Political History,” The Independent Review 12, no. 4 (Spring 2008): 519–535, https://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_12_04_2_faria.pdf. 68. Margarita Lopez-‐Maya, “Venezuela after the Caracazo: Forms of Protest in a Deinstitutionalized context,” Bulletin of Latin American Research 21, no. 2 (2002): 199–218, doi:10.1111/1470-‐9856.00040.
36
poor.69 Puntafijismo had taken class off the table. It also exposed the collusion
between organized labor, the Church, the Venezuelan military, and big business.
Victor Figueroa writes that this confluence of interests allowed the government to
proceed while paying scant attention to the needs of the people.70 It was this
combination of circumstances that led to the Caracazo and thereafter, two coup
attempts, one led by Hugo Chávez that resulted in his imprisonment. Ironically, it
was this coup attempt that led to the political opening that permitted the emergence
of Hugo Chávez onto the national scene in Venezuela. But the country would not
have been ready for that emergence without the Caracazo.
The Caracazo
According to Edgardo Lander, a professor at Universidad Central de
Venezuela, approximately five hundred to three thousand people lost their lives in
the government’s clampdown against the mobilization of the masses before and
after the Caracazo.71 According to Cannon, it was the Caracazo that put class issues
back on the table.72 In December 1988, Carlos Andres Perez, who had campaigned
against austerity, was elected to Venezuela’s Presidency. Within days of his
69. Nairbis Sibrian and Mario Millones Espinosa, “Antagonismo y Disenso: Tensiones y Limites en la Construccion Mediatica de la Politica en Venezuela,” Iconos: Revista de Ciencias Sociales 46 (2013): 49–65, doi:10.17141/iconos.46.2013.52. 70. Victor M. Figueroa, “The Bolivarian Government of Hugo Chávez: Democratic Alternative for Latin America?” Critical Sociology 32, no. 1 (2006): 201, doi:10.1163/156916306776150322. 71. Edgar Lander, interview by Paul Jay, Real News Network, video, “From Exile to Radicalization in Venezuela,” April 10, 2014, http://www.popularresistance.org/ from-‐exile-‐to-‐radicalization-‐in-‐venezuela/. 72. Barry Cannon, “Venezuela, April 2002: Coup or Popular Rebellion? The Myth of a United Venezuela,” Bulletin of Latin American Research 23, no.3 (2004): 285–302, doi:10.1111/j.0261-‐3050.2004.00109.x
37
swearing in, in February 1989, he announced that he had signed a structural
adjustment contract with the IMF. He had reneged on his campaign commitments.
He had campaigned against neoliberalism.73 According to Lopez-‐Maya, the protests
spread throughout the country in a matter of hours and, according to Webber, the
protests lasted until March 5, 1989. While Lopez-‐Maya touts the figure of some
8,355 protests that took place in Venezuela between October 1989 and September
2000,74 Webber writes that these protests were isolated and defensive in nature,
actually signaling the weakness of the Left. Organized labor, according to Webber,
had been disabled by its very collusion with the forces of neoliberalism.
Webber also investigates the status of the Left party: La Causa Radical (LCR).
According to Webber, LCR actually had done very well garnering over twenty
percent of the vote in the 1993 Presidential election. However, after that showing,
the party actually split over a dispute on whether or not the party should be drawn
into the politics of the two major parties. This split, and the formation of a new party
with the larger portion of the LCR membership, created the Patria Para Todos
(Fatherland for Everyone, PPT). Webber points out that in the absence of a strong
Left party, Chávez’s new political party, the Movimiento Quinta Republica (MVR, Fifth
Republic Movement) was provided a crucial opening with which to participate in
the 1998 Presidential elections.75 It was in the aftermath of Chávez’s 1992 failed
73. Anthony Peter Spanakos, “New Wine, Old Bottles, Flamboyant Sommelier: Chávez, Citizenship, and Populism,” New Political Science, 30, no. 4 (December 2008): 526, doi:10.1080/07393140802493308. 74. Lopez-‐Maya, “Caracazo,” 202. 75. Webber, “Venezuela and Chávez,” 21.
38
attempt to topple Venezuela’s military leaders that he gained favor from the same
people who were fed up with corruption and neoliberalism.
Chávez had been plotting, along with members of the Left (including his
brother, Adan), former guerrillas, and members of the Venezuelan military for years.
They were just waiting for the right time to strike. The dissolution of confidence in
the political process by the masses of Venezuela’s people laid the foundation for the
next rung to be placed on the ladder of Chávez’s political ascent.
“Commander Hugo Rafael Chávez Frias has Come to Lay Down His Weapons”
Officers and soldiers inside the Venezuelan military were not immune to the
sentiments that were pervasive in Venezuela against the corruption of the political
class and the economic elite. Chávez became the leader of a pre-‐existing group
inside the military. In fact, after the success of the Cuban Revolution, in May and
June of 1962, leftist military officers allied with Venezuela’s guerrillas of the armed
struggle, failed in two coup attempts, known as El Carupanazo and El Portenazo.
Venezuela’s armed struggle had attracted the support of other revolutionary
governments in Africa, Asia, and Cuba. William Izarra is named by Mascano and
Tyszyk as a veteran organizer for revolution inside the Venezuelan military.76 In
fact, according to Ciccariello-‐Maher, Izarra was a co-‐conspirator of Chávez for the
1992 coup attempt. The various incarnations of intrigue inside the military were
reflected in the creation of several clandestine organizations, for example the
Revolution 1983, Revolutionary Alliance of Active Military Personnel, Ejercito
Bolivariano Revolucionario (EBR, the Bolivarian Revolutionary Army). EBR was
76. Mascano and Tyszyk, Chávez, 21.
39
redubbed EBR-‐200 in 1983, the bicentennial of Bolivar’s birth. There was a parallel
line of officers who were not dreaming of social transformation, like Chávez’s group
was, but were also planning an effort to overthrow the corrupt military officer class.
The EBR-‐200 plan, when the moment appeared to be right, was supposed to take
advantage of a trip out of the country by the Venezuelan President, Carlos Andrés
Perez. Sergei Baburkin and a group of scholars analyzed the failed effort.77 They
write that a 1988 coup attempt against the previous President, Lusinchi, while he
was out of the country failed, but many of the conspirators remained in the military.
According to Baburkin’s researchers, the officers who survived the 1988 attempt
formed the kernel of the 1992 attempt, led by Colonel Hugo Chávez. For EBR-‐200,
the moment came in February 1992.
Marcano and Tyszka write that the Caracazo was the turning point for
Chávez who believed that it had sensitized members of the military for what was to
come next. Chávez’s promotion to Commander was also an important point for the
EBR-‐200 members, and considered a sign by Chávez of the approaching time for
action. On February 3, 1992, Chávez pulled the trigger for action. With hundreds of
soldiers in on the plot, Operation Zamora began to unravel even before it began. The
President went on television to address the country and reassure Venezuelans that
the country was firmly in democratic hands. Baburkin writes that in both instances,
the plotters failed to take the communication apparatus and both groups also failed
to secure the President in their custody. Chávez’s plan got derailed due to stormy
77. Sergei Baburkin, Andres C. Danopoulos, Rita Ciacalone, and Erika Moreno, “The 1992 Coup Attempts in Venezuela: Causes and Failure,” Journal of Political and Military Sociology 27, no. 1 (1999): 141–154.
40
weather that forced the President’s plane to land at a time and place not expected by
the conspirators. Despite the heroism of some of the soldiers under Chávez’s
command, Chávez surrendered to the authorities on February 4, 1992, securing a
commitment that the men involved with him would not be hurt. “My Admiral,
Commander Hugo Rafael Chávez Frias has come to lay down his weapons.”78
While this might have been the end for some failed plotters, this actually was
the beginning for Hugo Chávez. He negotiated an appearance on live television with
the Interior Minister who was still fearful that some of Chávez’s collaborators would
be unwilling to lay down their weapons. The plan was agreed upon, against the
advice of President Perez, and Chávez washed up and prepared for his debut on
national television, being sure to don his red beret. He had promised that he would
tell his men to lay their weapons down and so he did that, adding por ahora—“for
now.” Chávez also assumed responsibility for the Bolivarian movement inside the
Venezuelan military. People liked that he had taken responsibility for his and the
others’ actions. And they were left dangling at the end of Chávez’s “por ahora.”
Chávez, according to Marcano and Tyszka, felt himself a failure. It was only while
people lined up to visit him in prison that he realized that he was actually popular;
many Venezuelans had greatly approved of what he had attempted to do and of his
performance on national television. Marcano and Tyszka relate that some who were
intimately involved in the planning for the events of February 3 and 4 were
extremely disappointed in Chávez’s leadership because, as it turned out, Chávez was
78. These words spoken after the failed coup of 1992, are from Ivan Dario Jimenez, Los Golpes de Estado Desde Castro Hasta Caldera (Caracas: Centralca, 1996), quoted in Marcano and Tyszka, Hugo Chávez, 133.
41
the only one who had failed his part of the Operation. All aspects of the plan were
well-‐articulated—except Chávez’s. Nonetheless, for the average person on the
street, Hugo Chávez was now a hero.
Chávez served two years in prison and received an early release by President
Rafael Caldera. Caldera also restored Chávez’s political rights.79 After lengthy
debate, Chávez’s own political party, the MVR, decided that it was time to contest
the Presidential elections. Chávez traveled the length and breadth of Venezuela and
began to organize support for his effort. Therefore, the road had been cleared for
Chávez to accomplish with ballots what he did not achieve with bullets.80
The Rise of the Afro-‐Venezuelan Movement
In 2001 and 2002, during a regional drought in Brazil, Walter Neves and Luis
Pilo traveled to Brazil in order to understand the location of an earlier finding of the
largest number of human skeletons in one place in the Americas. The skulls were as
old as the Ice Age and were neither European nor Native American. The findings of
Neves and Pilo confirmed that the earliest skulls found thus far in the Americans
shared cranial features consistent with Africans and Australian Aboriginals while
northeast Asian human arrivals to the Americas occurred much later in time.81 It is
believed that these early East Africans migrated to South Asia and eventually to
Australia and from there to the Americas. Archeologists have named this oldest 79. Dietz and Myers, “From Thaw to Deluge,” 77. 80. Canache, “From Bullets to Ballots.” 81. Walter A. Neves, Mark Hubbe, and Luis Beethoven Pilo, “Early Holocene Human Skeletal Remains from Sumidouro Cave, Lagoa Santa, Brazil: History of Discoveries, Geological and Chronological Context, and Comparative Cranial Morphology,” Journal of Human Evolution 52, no. 1 (2007): 16–30, doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2006.07.012.
42
American “Luzia.” Neves confirms that the oldest skull found in the Americas has no
similarity with the Mongoloid features associated with modern Native Americans.82
Despite these rich beginnings in The Americas, descendants of Africans have had to
fight for their rightful place in human history during the current phase of human
civilization that has been shaped by global European colonial conquest. This is
discussed more thoroughly in the Section entitled, “The Role of Race in Latin
America and Venezuela.” There are estimated to be approximately one hundred fifty
million people of African descent in Latin America, with the bulk of them being in
Brazil and approximately ten percent of them living in Venezuela.83
The African presence in The Americas is denoted by the slave trade and the
Asientos de Negros, which was the commercial instrument that “legitimized” the
slave trade to Venezuela. The Africans brought to The Americas constituted a
technology transfer as well as a labor resource. They were knowledgeable in
agriculture, architecture, and other needed knowledge.84 Africans trafficked to
Venezuela as slaves are thought to primarily have originated in Congo, Senegambia,
Benin, Nigeria, and Angola and they worked in sugar, cocoa, and coffee production,
82. “THE FIRST PEOPLES: Ancient Voices–New Evidence Shows That the First Americans Were BLACK! ” YouTube video, 49:11, from British Broadcasting Corporation documentary, Ancient Voices, televised 1999, posted by Michael Heath, August 16, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiumX48gm1w. 83. Daniel Mato, “Forms of Intercultural Collaboration between Institutions of Higher Education and Indigenous and Afro-‐Descendant Peoples in Latin America,” Journal of Postcolonial Studies 14, no. 3 (2011), 332, doi:10.1080/13688790.2011.613104. 84. For example, see Judith A. Carney and Richard Nicolas Rosomoff, In the Shadow of Slavery: Africa’s Botanical Legacy in the Atlantic World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010).
43
gold mining, pearl hunting, and other.85 And as a result of miscegenation among the
various populations in the region and in Venezuela, a classification system was
devised by the Europeans that identified people based on their skin color, hair
texture, and parentage. One could be “Jet Black,” “pardo,” “Zambo” (from Black and
Indian) or “’a step backward’ when the skin color was darker than that of the
mother.”86 There were many more classifications of the enslaved used by the priests
when carrying out Venezuelan censuses, as well.
Total subjugation of the Africans was not completed in The Americas and
many rebellions took place from the Sixteenth Century throughout the period of
legalized slavery and after. The “American” colonial landscape was thus pockmarked
with rebellion. This was also true in Venezuela. The first of these Venezuelan revolts,
in the 1550s, was led by the “Negro Miguel” who had become a cimarrones or
“maroon”—a runaway slave. Cimarronaje is the term used to describe these violent
fights against slavery with the intention to be free. Cimarronaje is also an attitude;87
therefore, cimarronaje also entailed the establishment of self-‐governing societies,
called Cumbés. These cumbés dotted the Venezuelan landscape and could be
considered “liberated zones.” Taken to work the gold mines, Miguel escaped and fled
to the mountains where he joined with the Indigenous and created a strong cumbé
community that declared him King and among other things, regularly attacked the
85. Carole Boyce Davies, Encyclopedia of the African Diaspora: Origins, Experiences, and Culture (Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-‐CLIO, 2008), 941. 86. Ibid., 943. 87. For more information on the use of cimarronaje throughout “colonial America” as an alternative to enslavement, see Maria Cristina Navarette, “El Cimarronaje, Una Alternativa de Libertad Para Los Esclavos Negros,” http://doaj.org/toc/42e857e4adae4a0b8e5b3e88b1ad8945/2.
44
mines, making them ungovernable and unprofitable. As a result, the Spaniard
colonizers brought in military reinforcements to protect the mine. In one battle,
Michael was shot and his followers were re-‐enslaved. Cimarronaje is alive in the
culture of Venezuela today.88
Two centuries later, in the 1730s, some Africans had gained their freedom,
but were terrorized by a private cocoa company. The company coveted the cocoa
producing lands and used terror to obtain them. Andres Lopez del Rosario, also
known as Andresote, rose up against the tactics of the company and sabotaged its
operations. While Negro Miguel led the first anti-‐slavery uprising of slaves in
Venezuela, Andresote led Venezuela’s first uprising against corporate behavior. Later
in the century, around the 1790s, José Leonardo Chirino led an anti-‐slavery, anti-‐tax
small farmer uprising against the Spaniards. They were so threatened by Chirino
that they took him to Caracas where he was beheaded on December 17, 1796.
Afro-‐Venezuelans call these leaders their “preindependendistas” and note that
women participated in these rebellions, risking their lives as well, and also became
Maroons.89 By the early 1800s, a movement for independence from Spain had begun
in earnest. This followed the Haitian Revolution in which enslaved Africans
overthrew their French colonial masters and declared themselves a Republic in
1804.
Venezuelan criollos, children of Spanish parents who were born in the colony,
agitated for freedom from Spain. Among them were General Francisco Miranda and 88. See José Bracho Reyes, Chimbanguele: Paradigma del Cimarronaje Cultural en Venezuela (Caracas: Consejo Nacional de la Cultura, 2005). 89. For authentic Afro-‐Venezuelan voices, see, “Historia y Cultura Afrovenezolana,” http://culturaafrovenezolana.blogspot.com/2009/03/el-‐cimarronaje.html.
45
the wealthy Simon Bolivar. In order for the independence struggle to be successful,
the Indigenous and the Africans would have to be involved because they
outnumbered the Spanish living in Venezuela and the creoles—combined. Bolivar
asked the former slaves now in charge of Haiti for help. With Haiti’s help, Bolivar not
only won the independence of Venezuela, he also liberated Bolivia, Colombia,
Ecuador, and Peru. Venezuela declared its independence from Spain on July 5, 1811,
although the independendistas had not won militarily. Miranda was taken prisoner
by the Spaniards while the Spaniards continued their fight to regain their colonies.
In 1816, Bolivar issued two decrees declaring the end of slavery for Africans fighting
in the independence army, but in 1817 executed Manuel Maria Francisco Piar, the
son of a mulatto and someone who had traveled to Haiti. Bolivar accused him of
attempting to overthrow and murder Whites in order to establish a “pardo”
democracy in Venezuela, following the example of Haiti. He was acquitted of those
charges, but was found guilty of insubordination. On October 16, 1817, Piar was shot
at the Cathedral of Angostura, a tragic victim of racial discrimination even after
having secured military victories that rivaled those of Bolivar. His body now rests
with other Venezuelan heroes in the National Pantheon.
By 1824, the Spaniards had been defeated for good, and Bolivar would die on
December 17, 1830. All of Bolivar’s decrees were thrown out. The successful
independence army was dissolved and subjugated to slavery once again; the creoles
of Venezuela benefited from a victory that had been won and secured by the
Indigenous and the Africans. While Haiti abolished it in 1793, slavery did not
officially end in Venezuela until 1851 when owners of slaves were indemnified at
46
market rates for the loss of the use of their slaves. No such provisions were made for
the actual slaves themselves, many of who had served in the army during the wars
of Independence. The Africans lived a near feudal existence in their independence.
As a nation-‐building strategy, miscegenation and whitening were viewed by the
political elites as viable strategies, which included the marginalization of Indigenous
and African descendant people from the political and cultural affairs of the country.
It is from these beginnings that the modern-‐day Afro-‐Venezuelan struggle arises.
The struggle of African descendants in Latin America and especially in
Venezuela provides an important context for the rise of Hugo Chávez. The
African-‐descendant populations in Venezuela are urban, rural, and coastal. They are
poor and many are extremely poor. Their portrayals in the media are stereotypical.
And Hugo Chávez’s political ascent takes place alongside the political maturation of
the Afro-‐descendant community. In the 1990s, Latin America saw a significant rise
in African-‐descendant or Black organizations that championed policies to counter
their marginalization in society. These organizations formed national and
international networks that are still growing.90 The Network of Afro-‐Venezuelan
Organizations, founded by Jesus Chucho Garcia,91 unites the community in political,
economic, and cultural goals, starting with self-‐identification as Afro-‐descendants.
In May 2001, during the lead-‐up to participation in the United Nations World
Conference Against Racism, the Network held its first national conference. The 90. Agustin Lao-‐Montes, Amilcar Shabazz, Matilde Ribeiro, and Sonia E. Alvarez, Reconfigurations of Racism, Racial Politics/Policies and New Scenarios of Power: A Preliminary Research Agenda, October 2008, http://www.umass.edu/stpec/ pdfs/Reconfigurations%20of%Racism.pdf. 91. Jesus Chucho Garcia’s FaceBook page, https://www.facebook.com/pages/ Jes%C3%BAs-‐Chucho-‐Garc%C3%ADa/191341336202?fref=ts.
47
Network has set both national and international goals. Afro-‐Latinos struggle for
cultural space and recognition, or, as Mato puts it, “citizenship with equity.”92 The
success of the African-‐descendant struggle can be measured by the at-‐large
acceptance by society as a whole of that “citizenship with equity” practically
reflected in favorable laws and policies and also by the readiness of Latino
Americans and Venezuelans to self-‐identify as persons of African descent.
Figure 2.1. Pictures of “Luzia” reconstruction, earliest skull found in Americas. Provided by Professor Richard Neaves, the forensic expert who created the busts from skull from Northeastern Brazil. From his own collection and used here with his permission.
Hugo Chávez and the Epic Struggle against Neoliberalism
The popular citationality93 of Hugo Chávez centers on his leadership of
Venezuela in a Herculean confrontation with the United States. However, from the
standpoint of Chávez, there were serious philosophical underpinnings to that
confrontation that should be explored: for example, liberty versus repression;
92. Mato, “Collaboration,” 333. 93. Bruce Braun, “On the Raggedy Edge of Risk: Articulations of Race and Nature after Biology,” in Race, Nature, and the Politics of Difference, ed. Donald S. Moore et al. (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2003), 185. “Citationality” is the term used by Braun to describe the mental frames, images, statements, and narratives associated with any given term or personality whether they are true or not, achieving commonsense status by repetition.
48
self-‐determination versus domination and oppression; beating back the negation of
a prideful non-‐European identity; and a more equitable access to and distribution of
resources by way of national sovereignty and international cooperation and justice.
I believe some of the answers can be found in the neoliberal policies that the United
States sought to impose in Venezuela and the Southern Hemisphere through its
network of political supporters. Thus, the struggle against European domination and
neoliberalism and its disproportionately negative impact on people of color and
disproportionately favorable impact on Europeans in Venezuela unites Hugo Chávez
with a race and class analysis. Chávez is noted for saying that he favored neither a
savage neoliberalism nor statist socialism.94 However, the race aspect of Hugo
Chávez’s struggle both inside and outside of Venezuela is the one that is most
overlooked in scholarship.
So, what, exactly is neoliberalism? Neoliberalism is the name for policies that
ostensibly stress the limited role of government interference in economic activities
of corporations and highly capitalized individuals. Neoliberalism seeks, wherever
possible, to eliminate crowding out in a market by government activity and the
replacement of that government activity by the private sector. Therefore,
privatization is a key policy that is recommended for state action. In addition to
privatization, neoliberals advocate deregulation of the marketplace so that
businesses are allowed to do what they want. In practice, however, neoliberals act
as if the state should be in service to them; subsidies and tax-‐breaks for the wealthy
are considered income and growth generators, but payments to individuals in need 94. Javier Corrales, “Hugo Chávez Plays Simon Says: Democracy without Opposition in Venezuela,” Hopscotch: A Cultural Review 2, no. 2 (2000): 44.
49
are considered government waste. Therefore, the question is not really the size of
the government, but whom the government serves. And therein lies the issue.
Calling South America an “experimental laboratory” for “neoliberal transformation,”
Edgardo Lander and Luis Fierro give an exhaustive accounting of the impact of these
neoliberal policies on the Venezuelan economy and people.95 Lander and Fierro
write that income inequality accelerated, poverty increased by ten points to nearly
half of the entire population, and extreme poverty increased to fourteen percent.
According to David Theo Goldberg,96 the neoliberal state no longer seeks to
ameliorate inequality, but instead exacerbates it. This observation is consistent with
Lander’s findings. In Goldberg’s words, the neoliberal state privileges “the already
privileged.”97 In the Latin American setting, those already privileged are the
Europeans descendants from the Spanish settler colonists and those locked out of
access are the Indigenous whose land was stolen and who were physically subjected
to genocide and the Afro-‐Venezuelans, descendants of the Africans whose unpaid
labor built Venezuela and Spain.
Goldberg’s analysis of neoliberalism joins with a discussion of race.
Understanding the role of race in neoliberal policies is important for an
understanding of what was happening in Venezuela: the further entrenchment of
the wealth and political importance of White Venezuelans at the expense of
95. Edgardo Lander and Luis A. Fierro, “The Impact of Neoliberal Adjustment in Venezuela, 1989–1993,” Latin American Perspectives 23, no. 50 (July 1996): 5073, doi:10.1177/0094582X9602300304. 96. David Theo Goldberg, “Enduring Occupations (on Racial Neoliberalism),” in The Threat of Race: Reflections on Racial Neoliberalism, (Malden, MA: Wiley-‐Blackwell, 2009), 327–376. 97. Ibid., 332.
50
Indigenous and Afro-‐Venezuelans. In fact, according to Goldberg, the neoliberal state
becomes more violent and repressive—as has happened in the United States—
which Goldberg notes is the global driver for neoliberalism. Goldberg writes that
neoliberalism is an intensification of state capitalism and those who resist face
“militarized or policed impositions.”98
Some would say that the incarnations of European global domination have
run from slavery to colonialism (as will be discussed in the next section) to
neocolonialism,99 a concept first advanced by President of Ghana, Kwame
Nkrumah;100 to globalization, discussed in the next section by Anibal Quijano,
currently a professor in the Department of Sociology at Binghamton University; and
to that form of European domination that is prevalent today: neoliberalism. In this
way, neoliberalism is also a set of economic, political, and cultural tools that ensures
the continued domination of Europeans over the non-‐European world. Writing
about racial neoliberalism, Goldberg writes that this globalization improved the
lives of Europeans wherever they happened to reside; it increased their access to
economic inputs; it allowed them to exploit new labor pools; it impacted the way
polities was organized and the well-‐being derived from political participation; and it
created new identities. These new identities were created based on race, even
though the exact meaning of race shifted over time. Moreover, racism eventually 98. Ibid., 334. 99. For more information on Nkrumah’s vision of neocolonialism, see Norman E. Hodges, “Neo-‐colonialism: The New Rape of Africa,” The Black Scholar 3, no. 5 (1972): 12–23; see also Kenneth W. Grundy, “World Politics,” World Politics 15, no. 3 (1963): 438–454. 100. Kwame Nkrumah, Neo-‐colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism (London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1965).
51
transmuted into a higher ideological claim called “racelessness” or the raceless state,
the impact of which, according to Goldberg, is still as racist in practice as is
undiluted racism. Moreover, the structures of the state, according to Goldberg, are
shaped by globalization’s “foundational pillar,” which is race; race determines who
is included and who is excluded. But Goldberg doesn’t stop with the systemic
structural changes wrought by globalization and race. He adds that the concept of
race, itself, is neoliberalized in neoliberalism. Even race is privatized. And
structurally, power is retained by Whites. This background is important toward
gaining an understanding of why the Venezuelan population erupted after a decade
of neoliberal reforms.
Goldberg cites the attendant violence of neoliberalism, “necropolitical
discipline:” either imprisonment or physical or social death. This is the same
violence that is referred to by other writers about slavery, colonialism,
neocolonialism and so on. Other writers on this subject will be reviewed in this
chapter; those who are not reviewed include Ruth Gillmore and Angela Davis.101
Jacques Rancière, whose ideas will be discussed later, calls this “the police state”
whose purpose is to quash dissent, either violently or by cooptation. Therefore, the
neoliberal script includes the “inferiorization” of people of color. Heterogeneous
states, under the neoliberal model, can even maintain the reality of White power
while wearing the adornments of anti-‐racism. Goldberg writes that “Euromimesis,”
trying to behave and “think White” is the rule for neoliberalism. Racial duress is for
101. See Angela Y. Davis, Are Prisons Obsolete? (Toronto: Publishers Group Open Media, 2003), and Ruth Wilson Gilmore, Golden Gulag: Prisons, Surplus, Crisis, and Opposition in Globalizing California (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007).
52
those who break the rule. This is the function that was played in Venezuela by the
policy of mestizaje, which will be examined in the next section.
Finally, according to Goldberg, the neoliberal state is racist, repressive,
culturally dominating and alienating, and violent. Importantly, Goldberg unmasks
the real threat of race: it reveals a fear of loss of the kind of control and privilege
long associated with Whiteness. Neoliberalism, for Goldberg, then can be viewed as
the response to the impotence of Whiteness. This is the lens through which the
Caracazo should be viewed—as well as the behavior of the United States toward
Venezuela when Venezuela withdrew from the neoliberal agenda.
Dietz and Myers report that the militant neoliberalism of one candidate in the
1988 Presidential elections frightened voters in Peru and that candidate lost. We
have already seen how the Caracazo was brought about because one candidate
campaigned against the IMF structural adjustment policies recommended for
Venezuela and then days after his victory, signed the contract with the IMF. The
Caracazo was the lifting of the veil on the idea of a united Venezuela and the stark
visibility of another reality. And the state responded violently. Inequality, the
hallmark of the neoliberal state, led to the Caracazo. Just as Hurricane Katrina
unveiled huge inequality in New Orleans and the United States in 2005, the Caracazo
revealed inequality that had reached unacceptable levels to the Venezuelan people
The Role of Race in Latin American and Venezuela
In order to understand the significance of Hugo Chávez’s leadership on race,
one must understand the role of race in a world that has been dominated by
Europeans, and their descendants, for the last five hundred years. In order to
53
understand the role of race in Latin America and Venezuela, one must understand
the notion of race and how race has been used to aggrandize European cultural,
economic, and political domination over non-‐Europeans. In order to understand the
role of race in Latin America and Venezuela, one must understand slavery,
colonialism, neocolonialism, globalization, and neoliberalism and their contribution
to the notion and the role of race. Marxist-‐Leninism had been tried in the Caribbean
and Latin America, but the situation was different than that contemplated by Marx
or Lenin. Therefore, an adaptation was necessary and this is another aspect of the
revolutionary leadership of color of which Hugo Chávez was but one in a long line.
Besides, Marxists had a blind spot when it came to race. Anibal Quijano and others
point out that Marxists failed to fight slavery or to call for an anti-‐slavery revolution,
leaving many leaders of color with the idea that the Marxist idea of revolution was
an impossibility in Latin America and African colonial settings. Therefore, change
would have to be driven by Indigenous circumstances, by revolutionary,
justice-‐seeking people and their leaders, making sense from the context of their own
circumstances. That is what Hugo Chávez sought to accomplish by way of his
leadership and in some instances has been described as “eclectic” when it comes to
ideology. Thus, I will now turn to colonialism and Eurocentrism and their
implications for race.
54
Colonialism
Colonialism was one form of the institutionalization of global European
domination.102 At the same time that Europeans and their values were ennobled and
apotheosized, those of the colonial victim were systematically eroded or eliminated
to a state of abject docility, utter submission, and complete compliance. This was
both an individual internalization as well as an institutional process.
Samina Azad,103 writing from Pakistan, agrees that colonialism changes
“everything” about those dominated through colonization, including a change in
their beliefs, customs, tastes, and knowledge. She writes that the so-‐called “civilizing
mission” of the Europeans, led to their sense of superiority in their knowledge and
the inferiority of those they colonized. She writes that the Europeans secured this
position as a result of their readiness to use violence and advanced weaponry for
that time period. Like Azad, Anibal Quijano,104 localizes the practical impact of
colonialism and Eurocentrism on the people of Latin America with his “coloniality of
power” model. He discounts the reality of European notions of “civilizing the
natives” and instead writes about the reality of colonialism as faced by the
Indigenous and the imported Africans. Quijano notes the violence of the colonial
102. The distinction between “direct” colonialism and other forms of colonialism is made in Charles Pinderhughes “Toward a New Theory of Internal Colonialism,” Socialism and Democracy 25, no. 1 (March 2011): 235–256, doi:10.1080/08854300.2011.559702. 103. Samina Azad, “Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man and Postcolonialism,” International Journal of Social Sciences & Education 3, no. 2 (2013): 413–421. http://www.africanafrican.com/folder12/african%20african%20american2/civil%20rights%20movement/Paper-‐15.pdf. 104. Anibal Quijano, “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America,” Nepantla: Views from South 1, no. 3 (2000): 533–580, doi:10.1177/0268580900015002005.
55
conquest by the Europeans by noting that it was accompanied by the genocide of
approximately sixty-‐five million people, which he calls the most extreme case of
cultural colonization that Europe was able to accomplish. African cultural
colonization, he writes, was less complete and less successful, so the Europeans just
denied recognition to the Africans whose artistic expressions were Europeanized
and never considered equal to the European cultural norm.105
Azad explains some of the features of colonialism: the center/periphery
phenomenon, the comprador class, and the phenomenon of “dislocation”—a fate
suffered by the local culture. All of these elements are important to note now for the
discussion in the fourth chapter. Azad writes of the center/periphery phenomenon
present in settler colonialism where a few settlers from the metropole or colonial
“motherland” settle in the periphery where the colonized lived. These Europeans,
situated in the land of the colonized, act as the bridge between the two, but with
deference given to European superiority. Azad also uses the notion of the
comprador class of the colonized who are trained by the Europeans to maintain
European control and become agents of the colonial establishment.106 Dislocation
refers to what happens to the local culture during the establishment and
maintenance of colonialism and in its aftermath unless concrete steps are taken to
dismantle the dislocation and relocate oneself inside one’s own or a post-‐colonial
105. Anibal Quijano, “Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality,” Cultural Studies 21, nos. 2–3 (March/May 2007): 168–178, doi:10.1080/09502380601164353. 106. Indeed, Hairston finds that President Obama continues and reinforces White domination and White superiority in education by his neoliberal approach. See Thomas W. Hairston, “Continuing Inequity through Neoliberalism: The Conveyance of White Dominance in the Educational Policy Speeches of President Barack Obama,” Interchange 43 (March, 2013): 229–244, doi:10.1080/09502380601164353.
56
culture. Goldberg’s idea of Euromimesis is the product of such colonial dislocation.
Indeed, this is a phenomenon that can be identified wherever European domination
has taken root.
Therefore, one can see Euromimetic behavior in Asia as Ruth Holliday and
Joanna Elfving-‐Hwang found with plastic surgery in South Korea where both men
and women seek more global, as well as regional, ideas of beauty.107 They find that
the most popular surgery is the eyelid surgery and secondly, the rhinoplasty that
eliminates the wide, flat nose. Euromimesis and dislocation can also be seen in the
ideas of beauty in Latin America and the Caribbean, which I will further explore
below.
European colonialism in the Western Hemisphere was accompanied by
capitalism and the theft of land from the Indigenous and the importation of Africans
as unpaid labor to work that land. Another distinguishing factor for the European
colonial model of power is that capitalism produced products for a world market.
Quijano writes of the gold and silver and other commodities that were produced
with unpaid Black and Indigenous or mestizo labor: it all contributed to the
comparative advantage of Europeans everywhere around the world. Europeans
controlled the capital and Europeans controlled the labor. Thus, the important
feature of European colonialism, as Quijano writes, is that non-‐Europeans worked
all over the world, literally, for nothing—they got paid nothing, and all over the
world, Europeans received wages. Soon, non-‐wage work came to be associated with
107. Ruth Holliday and Joanna Elfving-‐Hwang, "Gender, Globalization and Aesthetic Surgery in South Korea,” Body & Society 18, no. 2 (2012): 58–81, doi:10.1177/1357034X12440828.
57
non-‐European workers and became inferior work, because non-‐Europeans were
defined as inferior. Quijano says that this system continues to this day of unequal
pay for equal work, adding that Indigenous serfdom was only recently eliminated.
The system became global as Europeans expanded their control over America, then
Africa, then Asia and Oceania. Quijano sees three stages in that the process of
domination:
1. Expropriated the cultural discoveries of the colonized peoples;
2. Repressed their forms of knowledge production; and
3. Forced the colonized to learn the dominant culture so as to serve
Europe and not themselves
Thus, European success led to a kind of European ethnocentrism where they
equated themselves with rationality and modernity; Blacks and Indigenous were
characterized as primitive and Asians were characterized as an inferior “Other.”
Quijano writes that for the European, race is the basic category. He says in
scholarship, these issues can be found in Post-‐Colonial, Subaltern, Cultural Studies
and others. Demonization of the non-‐European was not only morally necessary from
the point of view of the Europeans, but also expedient. The location of European
values and culture became central to life in the metropole as well as in the colony.
Thus, Eurocentrism is the handmaiden of European colonialism.
58
Eurocentrism
Eurocentrism is a term that has been most closely studied by Samir Amin108
in 1989 in the first edition of his book of the same name, who says that the
phenomenon of Eurocentrism commenced around the same time as capitalism. It is
a kind of prejudice that believes that the non-‐European world has nothing to teach
the European West. According to Amin, the exploitation of others requires a
rationale and Eurocentrism became the ideology that justified the ultimate
exploitations represented by genocide of the Indigenous and the human trafficking
and enslavement of the Africans. Ironically, while Europeans took their ideas on a
so-‐called civilizing mission to the rest of the world, Amin believes that Europeans
and their capitalism have endangered human civilization. Therefore, Eurocentrism,
to Amin, is the ideological force that creates the notion of a periphery and thus is
anti-‐universal even as it is global.
According to Kamran Matin,109 Eurocentrism is a belief that the world starts
and stops in Europe, which means this: there is Europe and there is not-‐Europe;
Europe is responsible for human progress; and not-‐Europe is dominated as a
natural outcome of the meeting up of Europe with an inferior culture so that
domination had nothing to do with violence. Matin sees this Eurocentrism in
108. Samir Amin, Eurocentrism: Modernity, Religion, and Democracy: A Critique of Eurocentrism and Culture, trans. Russell Moore and James Membrez, 2nd ed. (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2009). 109. Kamran Matin, “Redeeming the Universal: Postcolonialism and the Inner Life of Eurocentrism,” European Journal of International Relations 19 (2013): 353–377, doi:10.1177/1354066111425263.
59
International Relations Theory. Fernando Suarez Muller110 adds that Eurocentrism
has four levels of conceptualization: as a perspective: as an exclusion, as a sense of
superiority, and as a system of oppression.
Writing about the impact of Eurocentrism on sociology, Julian Go111 suggests
that post-‐colonial theory seeks to de-‐Eurocenter sociology and to recognize the
parochialism of Eurocentrism while Irene Visser112 writes of the need to recognize
Eurocentrism in trauma theory even in the study of the trauma that accompanies
colonialism. Finally, it is important to understand that Eurocentrism in practice
gives way to racism. And, as we have previously discussed, racism becomes
embedded in unintentional thought and action and so, becomes structural and
systemic.113
Quijano’s first point, while writing in the year 2000, is that the phenomenon
of globalization is the culmination of Eurocentered capitalism; and Eurocentered
capitalism classifies populations based on race. For Quijano, globalization is
Eurocentrism. That could be updated to read neoliberalism. In fact, in 2007 he
updated his theory by adding the notion of “coloniality”— a colonial structure of
European political, social, and economic domination without political colonialism,
much as Goldberg writes of “racisms without racism,” which are racially driven
110. Fernando Suarez Muller, “Eurocentrism, Human Rights, and Humanism,” International Journal of Applied Philosophy 26, no. 2 (2012): 279–293. doi:10.5840/ijap201226221. 111. Juian Go, “For a Postcolonial Sociology,” Theory & Society 42, no. 1 (2013): 25–55, doi:10.1007/s11186-‐012-‐9184-‐6. 112. Irene Visser, “Trauma Theory and Postcolonial Literary Studies,” Journal of Postcolonial Writing 47, no. 3 (July 2011): 270–282, doi:10.1080/17449855.2011.569378. 113. For a fuller discussion of this, see Essed, Understanding Everyday Racism.
60
expressions of today’s neoliberal policies. Eduardo Bonilla-‐Silva writes about this
convenient self-‐characterizing neoliberal turn as “racism without ‘racists’” from his
book by the same name.114
Quijano writes that the vestige of colonialism that remains is the “racial axis,”
outliving the colonialism, which birthed it. He posits that the model of power for
today is a global one, hegemonic, and based on race. He writes that America—and by
America he does not mean only the United States—was the laboratory for this first
exercise of global power. He writes that the Conquistadores started it, but quickly it
became a global practice. He traces this exercise of power back to the desire of the
colonial hegemon to control labor. According to Quijano, slavery was just the most
recent manifestation at that time. Before, he writes, it was serfdom. According to
Quijano, race is now a part of the structural control of labor. Quijano is not alone in
this view and is joined by Jeffrey Perry115 who writes and lectures extensively on the
role of the concept of “Whiteness” as a method of social control for labor. Perry has
tested his ideas while developing policies for organized labor. He also provides a
prescription in the fight against White Supremacy and Eurocentrism, which I will
discuss in the final section of this chapter.
Interestingly, Quijano points out that Eurocentrism is actually based on
myths: that human civilization culminated in Europe, and that power really had
nothing to do with their domination of the rest of the world. According to Quijano, it 114. Eduardo Bonilla-‐Silva, Racism without Racists: Color-‐Blind Racism and the Persistence of Inequality in America, 4th ed. (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014). 115. Jeffrey B. Perry, The Developing Conjuncture and Some Insights from Hubert Harrison and Theodore W. Allen on the Centrality of the Fight Against White Supremacy, http://www.jeffreybperry.net/files/Perry.pdf.
61
is only because of their power that they were able to convince the rest of the world
of their myths. Thus, Quijano provides a powerful counterpoint to the notion put
forward about the benevolence of colonialism, Eurocentrism, or its concomitant
racism. Quijano is not alone in providing this assessment: Barrueto116 discusses
Eurocentrism in Latin American literature and concludes that writing in Latin
America is openly pro-‐European. He also mentions “mimicry,” theorized by
Bhabha,117 which is an important result that occurs among those who are colonized
and whose culture is dislocated. Mimicry, according to Barrueto, is the colonial
victim’s attempt to imitate or conform to the values of the colonizer. This also occurs
when one is considering a standard of beauty in a racialized context. In the end,
European colonialism was the first to consume the entire population of the planet.
Thereby, a “Eurocentric perspective of knowledge”118 is imposed on the world. Race
became a new way of legitimizing old practices. Social relations between the
dominated and the conqueror became regulated by race. And it is to a discussion of
race that I will now turn. Race and racial identity become the major area of focus.
Race
For the reasons enumerated above and more that will follow, the political
problem confronted by Hugo Chávez was that the Europeans in Venezuela identified
more with Europeans in the United States than they did with their fellow
Venezuelans. Therefore, race and racial identity are at the core of this discussion, as
116. Jorge J. Barrueto, “A Latin American Indian Re-‐Reads the Canon: Postcolonial Mimicry in El Senor Presidente,” Hispanic Review 72, no. 3 (2004): 339–356. 117. See Homi Bhabha, “Of Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse,” October 28 (Spring 1984): 125–133, doi:10.2307/778467. 118. Quijano, “Coloniality of Power,” 534.
62
has been pointed out in the literature reviewed thus far. After five hundred years of
domination, the challenge for leaders looking to liberate themselves and others is
how to navigate all of these hidden—and not so hidden—identity landmines. And,
because of its citationality, race has proven itself to be a long-‐lasting and effective
“instrument of universal social domination.”119 At some point in their lives, most
non-‐Europeans have to grapple with the exclusivity of the European “club” and their
devaluation in it. However, membership depends as much on other factors as it does
on “race.”
Race is a concept that is not supposed to exist: “biologically, there is one race
and that is the human race that originated in Africa.”120 First publishing on this in
1942, Ashley Montagu was among those early scholars who saw race as more
construct than genetic intelligence determinant.121 Then, in writings from 1994 to
1997, Theodore Allen described how notions of race were specifically tied to class.
He believed that race was political and not biological. He wrote, “When a group of
human beings from ‘multiracial’ (the anthropologist’s term) Europe goes to North
America or South Africa and there, by constitutional fiat, incorporates itself as the
‘white race,’ that is no part of genetic evolution.”122 Allen maintained that race was a
ruling class social control formation. Finding the “white identity” to be problematic,
119. Ibid., 535. 120. Jeffrey B. Perry, “Race,” (Unpublished paper, 2014), 1. 121. Ashley Montagu, Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race (Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 1997). 122. Allen, Invention of the White Race: The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-‐America (London: Verso, 1997).
63
Allen went further and characterized it as a form of class collaboration.123 Following
in Montagu’s footsteps two generations later, the American Anthropological
Association in May of 1998 adopted a statement that human populations are not
biologically distinguishable and that most DNA evidence suggests that human
variability lies within racial groups.124 They go on to state that European Americans
“fabricated” characteristics associated with each race, which became a mode of
classification. They write that this classification was tied to people living in a
colonial setting. Race, then, is merely an “idea.” As we can see, this is an idea whose
ramifications have damaged people all over the planet for centuries.
Quijano writes that when the Europeans arrived in America, they found
advanced civilizations of Incas, Aztecs, Maya, Aymaras and more. Three hundred
years later, they are all merged into one category: Indian or Indigenous. He says that
the same thing happened with the Africans who were Ashanti, and Yoruba, and
Zulus, and Congos, but all became just Blacks. He writes that people were
dispossessed of their own identities and their new identity involved the plunder of
their place in history and their cultural production.125 In America, Quijano writes,
social relations found new identities on the basis of race: Indigenous, Blacks,
Mestizos. He says that in the beginning, Whites were Spanish or Portuguese, and
only much later became “European.” These social relations, according to Quijano,
were based on domination. Race became an instrument of social classification.
123. Theodore Allen, “White Supremacy in U.S. History,” speech at the Guardian Forum, April 28, 1973, http://www.sojournertruth.net/whitesupremushist.html. 124. See “American Anthropological Association ‘Statement on ‘Race,’ “ (May 17, 1998), http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm. 125. Quijano, “Coloniality of Power,” 552.
64
“White” comes to mean domination imposed by conquest, according to
Quijano. Thus, “a new global model of labor control” was called for: race. Thus, race
and labor became linked. And the division of labor was constructed by race. In this
way, the racial labor distribution became a global system. New identities were
created and they had their place within this “racist” hierarchy of labor. According to
Quijano, whiteness meant wages or a high position and each form of labor control
was done by a particular race. This allowed the Europeans to control entire
populations of people. Race became a new technology of domination, exploitation,
and control.
So, the dominated became an inferior phenotype. And yet, they had to cope.
Azad discusses the cultural dislocation that takes place. Goldberg discusses the
phenomenon of Euromimesis. This domination manifests itself differently in men
and women, and the signs of gendered racial domination can be pointed out. Monica
G. Moreno Figueroa and Megan Rivers Moore126 argue that race is always a
consideration when it comes to notions of beauty—especially in Latin America
including the Caribbean. Utilizing Feminist Theory, they look at the factors
underlying the definition of beauty, that is the “socio-‐political framework” of beauty.
The Feminist Theory approach looks at the pragmatics of beauty, its definition,
deployment, marketing, that all lead to the place of gender and value in a society.
They found that race is central to the idea of beauty in Latin America and the
Caribbean. They write that it is relatively new that this approach is being taken in
126. Monica G. Moreno Figueroa and Megan Rivers Moore, “Beauty, Race, and Feminist Theory in Latin America and the Caribbean,” Feminist Theory 14, no. 2. (2013): 131–136, doi:10.1177/1464700113483233.
65
the Latin American and Caribbean context where the mestizaje idea just put people
at a “whiter than” or “darker than” kind of situation because everyone had Black
(Afro or Indigenous) in them. The question was how much. Mestizaje was a national
policy in Venezuela that denied that there was a race or class issue because,
according to the policy, everyone was mixed. However, the real effect, according to
the Venezuelan authors reviewed here, was that the Indigenous and Afro identities
were eliminated.
Sandra Angeleri127 is professor of Ethnic Studies and Race at the Central
University of Venezuela. She also mentions this aspect of Latin American
considerations of beauty and more. She adds that the use of a woman’s body created
the Creole: Indigenous or African—to make mestizaje a feature of Venezuelan
identity. This new identity had, as its real purpose, to “bleach out” the Indigenous
and African in order to create a “criollo latina.”128 She writes that they called
themselves “Latino” to avoid contamination with Black or Afro-‐descendant or
Indigenous.
Elizabeth Gackstetter Nichols carries the same Feminist Theory application
of the notion of beauty into the Venezuelan setting, where an authentic Venezuelan
identity was forged by suppressing the African and the Indigenous aspects of it.129
The goal of this project, she writes, was to maintain a pure European bloodline: this
would be done by controlling women’s bodies. Decent girls, then, had hair that was 127. Sandra Angeleri, “Ponencia_Coro,” (Unpublished Paper, Universidad Central de Venezuela, 2014). 128. Ibid., 5. 129. Elizabeth Gackstetter Nichols, “‘Decent Girls with Good Hair’: Beauty, Morality and Race in Venezuela,” Feminist Theory 14, no. 2 (2013): 171–185, doi:10.1177/1464700113483243.
66
not too wooly (that would indicate too much Afro) and not too straight (that would
indicate too much Indigenous). Women linked good with White and this was
furthered in Venezuela with its national identity of Mestizaje. Because of the high
degree of mixing in Venezuela, skin color alone was not the marker—the wide nose
and the curly hair—were also used to gauge lineage. Non-‐White was equated with
“ugly” and “deformed.” In this way, Venezuela’s racist past has produced a racist
present.
This racist present is evidenced in the research of Lauren Gulbas who
investigated the incidence of rhinoplasty in Venezuela and found that the plastic
surgery provided a boost in one’s self–esteem while allowing so motivated women
to pursue the ideal of Whiteness.130 Gulbas says that women of color in pursuit of
this ideal live in a place of body insecurity.
Because of the patriarchal nature of a colonial setting, women are cast in the
role of “the body,” Nichols writes. And Black women carry the double stigma of
savage and “out of control.” La negra becomes the plaything for the White male; La
negra is the servant of the White female. Racial purity was elevated to a moral value.
Thus is the status of women in a patriarchal colonial setting and this status
continues generation after generation because the young are enculturated “into
gendered and racialized” standards of beauty.
Angeleri also recalls Venezuela’s history: over four hundred years ago,
Africans were forcibly taken from West Africa and forced to work on the plantations.
“Portugal, Holland, France, and Spain did this,” she says, “to millions of men, women,
130. Gulbas, Embodying Race.
67
and children to ensure the economic and political power of Europe on American
soil.”131 She identifies a matrix of racism and patriarchal capitalism as the offspring
of these centuries of slavery.
Angeleri writes that Venezuelans are well steeped in racism, which she
characterizes as a technology of death. And the goal of the social movements that
resulted from the Caracazo is control of the state so that Venezuela can have a public
policy that supports and reproduces life. According to Angeleri, Afro–Venezuelans
and Indigenous in Venezuela are the ultimate expression of the struggle for life—of
the will to live—because of the way racism affects them. She writes that racism has
excluded them from the life of Venezuela. Racism has discriminated against them.
Racism has been harsh to them and yet, they have developed the will to live despite
racism. Therefore, to Angeleri, Afro–Venezuelans are the teachers on the struggle for
life. She credits Afro–Venezuelan spirituality as the inspiration that sustains the
movement and that is its source of political power; it is their spirituality that allows
them to survive the many forms of oppression. It is their spirituality that allows
them to overcome the death technology of racism.
Angeleri characterizes the struggle in Venezuela as a struggle for the poorest
sectors of Venezuelan society. She then asks, “Who are the poor that we struggle
for?” She says that in Venezuela, poverty has a female face—women from the inner
city and women from the countryside. In addition to women, the poorest sectors of
Venezuelan society are Afro–descendants and Indigenous. According to Angeleri, it
is the Afro–descendants and the Indigenous who fight discrimination—that comes
131. Angeleri, “Ponencia Coro,” 4–5.
68
from racism; that live in the most polluted environments—that comes from racism;
that have the poorest quality of education available and the fewest choices; that
suffer with the worst medical care whether one is pointing to primary care, hospital
care, or private practice.
Jesus Maria Herrera Salas continues where Angeleri ends and situates the
matter of race squarely in Venezuela in his books and articles. Herrera Salas has
written extensively about race in Venezuela. His first book, published in 2003, was
entitled: The Black Miguel and the First Venezuelan Revolution: The culture of power
and the power of culture.132 In it, he recounts Venezuela’s slave insurrections for
freedom. In 2005, Herrera Salas published another accounting of the slave era
covering the wider Caribbean region, How Europe appropriated the African Mother’s
Milk in the Caribbean: An Essay on ‘Barbarism’ and ‘Civilization.’133 And then finally,
in 2010, Herrera Salas published The Political Economy of Racism in Venezuela. In
2005, Herrera Salas writes “Ethnicity and Revolution: The Political Economy of
Racism in Venezuela.”134
Herrera Salas credits Jun Ishibashi, a Japanese professor at the University of
Tokyo, with cracking wide open and shattering the glass encasement that
constituted “racial democracy” in Venezuela. In fact, what Ishibashi did, was to put a
lie to the myth of Venezuelan democratic exceptionalism—that Venezuela was 132. Jesus Maria Herrera Salas and Miquel Izard, The Black Miguel and the First Venezuelan Revolution: The Culture of Power and the Power of Culture (Caracas: Vadell Hermanos, 2003). 133. Jesus Maria Herrera Salas, How Europe Appropriated the African Mother’s Milk in the Caribbean: An Essay on ‘Barbarism’ and ‘Civilization’ (Bogota: Editorial Tropykos Fund, 2005). 134. Jesus Maria Herrera Salas, “Ethnicity and Revolution: The Political Economy of Racism in Venezuela,” Latin American Perspectives 32, no. 2 (2005): 72–91.
69
uniquely democratic in the region. Hererra Salas also states that Ishibashi’s work
sparked serious debate in Venezuela on race—the heretofore “taboo subject.” (I will
review Ishibashi later in this chapter, but for now I will say that Ishibashi explored
the Black image in the Venezuelan media.135). Adriana Bolivar and her co–authors
tackle this issue in van Dijk’s Racism and Discourse in Latin America.136
Herrera Salas states that the political economy of racism in Venezuela is
nothing more than a continuation of the Spanish conquest and enslavement of its
Indigenous and Black populations that began in 1496. According to Herrera Salas, it
is this background of slavery and the Spanish colonial system that can lay claim to
the roots of racism that Venezuela experiences today.
Herrera Salas writes that the economic crisis of 1983 led to a reopening of
the ugly, open racism that had been masked by several policies associates with
nation building and identity. He says that one must go back to the era of the slave
and colonial period where Africans were imported to work the land stolen from the
Indigenous people, in order to fully understand racism in Venezuela today.
According to Herrera Salas, this “legalized” human trafficking and subjected the
Africans to “physical humiliation, economic exploitation, social exclusion, and sexual
violence.”137 Importantly, Herrera Salas notes that this human trafficking and
135. Jun Ishibashi, “Hacia una Apertura del Debate Sobre el Racismo en Venezuela: Exclusion y Inclusion Estereotipada de Personas ‘Negras’ en los Medios de Communicacion,” in Politicas de Identidades y Differencias Sociales en Tiempos de Globalizacion, ed. Daniel Mato (Caracas: FACES, Universidad Central de Venezuela, 2003), 33–61. 136. Adriana Bolivar et al., “Discourse and Racism in Venezuela: A Café Con Leche Country,” ed. Teun A. van Dijk, Racism and Discourse in Latin America (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2009), 291–334. 137. Herrera Salas, “Political Economy,” 73.
70
violence [now internationally recognized as a crime against humanity] contributed
to the overall wealth that Europe enjoys today.
Herrera Salas notes that although the slave trade became illegal in Venezuela
by 1797, it did not end right away. Just prior to the outlawing of the trade, the Royal
Certificate of Special Dispensation allowed those of mixed race to “purchase” the
White classification. This move was roundly rejected by the local criollos. The
criollos continued slavery and promoted White immigration while prohibiting Black
immigration into Venezuela. This guaranteed White hegemony with or without the
Special Dispensation. Whitening became the national policy of Venezuela.
Herrera Salas asserts that the economic crisis of 1983 brought racism out of
the closet and back center stage in Venezuelan politics. Blacks and Indigenous who
had migrated to Venezuela from surrounding countries were blamed for the
downturn. This is when, according to Herrera Salas, the Black and Indigenous
peoples counter organized. He writes that by 1998, the political situation had
massively deteriorated and there was a loss of confidence by the electorate in the
major political parties. Writing in 2005, Herrera Salas recognized that the political
and economic power in Venezuela at that time was still in the hands of the Whites
who are as resentful of the gains of the people as they were in the days when the
Special Dispensation became policy from the Spanish Monarch.
Jun Ishibashi, George Ciccariello–Maher, and Barry Cannon provide what I
believe to be the most compelling explanations for the role of the media in
perpetuating the “coloniality of power” in Venezuela and racism without racists. In
2003, the University of Central Venezuela published a book in which Jun Ishibashi
71
wrote a chapter whose title can be translated from the Spanish as “Towards an
opening of the debate on racism in Venezuela: Exclusion, inclusion and stereotyping
of ‘black ‘ people in the media.”138 In his meticulous study, Ishibashi exposed a
devastating picture of the purposeful stereotyping of Blacks in the Venezuelan
media. Portrayals were intentional and when questioned by Ishibashi, producers of
television commercials pointedly said to him that they did not want to cast Blacks in
certain roles that would appear to make them equal to Whites.
George Ciccariello–Maher writes about the “racial geography” of Caracas and
White Venezuelan racism as a “structural fear of penetration.” Similar to Goldberg’s
“threat of race” thesis, Ciccariello–Maher points out that the polarization that exists
in Venezuela today is more than a matter of class. He writes that it “touches the
heart of questions of race.” Remembering Foucault and quoting Fanon,
Ciccariello–Maher recognizes the wall–building and newly–created insulated
municipalities around Caracas, as efforts to contain the penetration of Venezuela’s
people of color. Ciccariello–Maher recalls Fanon in Black Skin, White Masks, “the
Negro symbolizes the biological danger . . . [and] . . . is castrated.”139
Barry Cannon supplies an important piece of knowledge that is missing from
articles seeking to explain voting behavior in Venezuela: the role of race and class in
the electoral success of Hugo Chávez.140 Cannon goes to great lengths to explain the
demographic realities of Venezuela and its history of miscegenation among Africans,
Indigenous, and Spaniards and other Europeans. He writes that by the end of the 138. Ishibashi, “Hacia una Aperture.” 139. George Ciccariello-‐Maher, “Toward a Racial Geography of Caracas: Neoliberal Urbanism and the Fear of Penetration,” Qui Parle 16, no. 2 (2007): 43. 140. Cannon, “Venezuela, April, 2002” (see n. 72).
72
colonial era “60% of Venezuelans had African origins and of the 25% classified as
White, probably some 90% had some African ancestry.”141
Cannon brings his reader up to modern–day Venezuela and the role of the
media in devaluing darker–skinned Venezuelans. He writes that Blacks in the media,
especially darker–skinned Blacks, are veritably invisible. Cannon writes that
Afro–Venezuelans are considered “ugly.” Canon then says that roughly 64% of
Venezuelans self–identify as non–White, but that given the context of the
undervaluation of the Black, the probability of under–identifying as Black, Afro, or
Indigenous is probably quite high. It is the probability that Venezuelans with darker
skin will vote for Chávez that Cannon brings into the discussion. And why not?
Chávez, himself, incorporated race and class into his own discourse. Many
academics have focused on class, as one of the few, if not the only factor; Cannon
focused on Chávez, his voters, and race.
Cannon goes on to provide evidence of the racism in Venezuelan media rising
to the level that one of the private channels, Globovision, was publicly rebuked
because it portrayed Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe as a monkey. A
contemporaneous news report by Venezuelanalysis.com explained the context of
what the African Ambassadors from Egypt, Libya, South Africa, Nigeria, Western
Sahara, and Algeria found so offensive. The host of Globovision TV show “Alo
Cuidadano,” Leopoldo Castillo, laughed while saying that Zimbabwean President
141. Cannon, “Class/Race Polarisation,” 735.
73
Robert Mugabe reminded him of the monkey–people142 from the movie “Planet of
the Apes.” A former Venezuelan state oil executive, Gustavo Coronel, has likened
Chávez to Mugabe in a bitter diatribe aimed at the former and rife with not so subtle
allusions to sub–human characteristics of both.143
Another example of racial bias in the media directed toward Chávez is seen in
a number of published, offensive, racially charged political animations of him. One,
by Kiko Rodriguez, circulated in private Venezuelan media is entitled, “Miko
Mandante,” a play on the words, “Mi Comandante” (My Leader); “Miko Mandante”
can be translated as “Ape Leader.”144 In it, Chávez is portrayed as thick–lipped
gorilla wielding a baseball bat dripping blood and on which is written “revolucian”.
In Chávez’s right hand is a small desperate blue bird representing the endangered
free press. Rodriguez’s caricature followed a venerable—and enduring—racist
142. Oscar Heck, “This is One of the Main Reasons Why I Love Venezuela…” Aletho News, November 12, 2010, https://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/oscar-‐heck-‐this-‐is-‐one-‐of-‐the-‐main-‐reasons-‐why-‐i-‐love-‐venezuela-‐%E2%80%A6/. 143. See Gustavo Coronel, “Robert Mugabe and Hugo Chávez: God Creates Them and They Get Together,” http://www.vcrisis.com/index.php?content=letters/ 200402280436. Coronel was a member of the Board of Directors of Petróleos de Venezuela (1976–79) and has also written critically of Chávez for the Cato Institute, a Washington, D.C.-‐based libertarian think-‐tank, funded in part by the Koch Brothers. See Robert Greenwald and Jesse Lava, “Cato Institute Koch Brothers,” Huffington Post, May 13, 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/cato-‐institute-‐koch-‐brothers/. 144. For the visual image and discussion by Rodriguez of it, see David Schonhauer, “Latin American Ilustracion Winner Spotlight: Kiko Rodriguez,” AI-‐AP Dispatches from Latin America, May 22, 2013.
74
tradition of depicting Africans and their descendants as monkeys or gorillas. 145 This
cartoon won the First Annual Latin American Illustration Competition. 146
Similar in their use of primate symbolism are many caricatures that have
appeared in El Universal, done by a popular Venezuelan cartoonist, Rayma Suprani.
In one, she vulgarly depicts a purported changed standard of beauty in Bolivarian
Venezuela showing three pretty and pale–skinned flight attendants from other Latin
American countries but a hairy ape from Venezuela. Another showing the “Nuevo
Ordin Politico (New Political Order), illustrated chessboard pieces with a banana
instead of a King.147 The same sort of motif appeared in a January 2009 cartoon
showing Chávez leaving a trail of bananas behind him.148 Non–government
organizations protective of press freedoms have publicized anonymous threats
against Suprani urging supporters to write and demand public inquiries from the
Venezuelan government. No mention is made by these “defenders” of her long
sequence of racist “artwork” intended to incite White and criollo opposition and
hatred towards Chávez and, more generally, toward the rise of Black and Indigenous
power in Venezuela.
Understanding this background, I queried Barry Cannon, an Irishman in
Ireland, on how he came to be an author who focuses on race in Venezuela. He found 145. See for example “The Coon Caricature: Blacks as Monkeys,” http://www.authentichistory.com/diversity/african/3-‐coon/6-‐monkey/. 146. Latin American Illustracion, http://www.aiap.com/publications/article/6584/ latin-‐american-‐ilustracion-‐winner-‐spotlight-‐kiko.html. 147. Rayma for El Universal, December 10, 2012, http://www.eluniversal.com/ eu3/vinetasdelMes12_2012.html. 148. Rayma Caricaturas FaceBook page, https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1086702040132&set=pb.1003856565.-‐2207520000.1408032770.&type=3&theater.
75
my question interesting; his response is equally so; it was basically that he came to
understand how race works as an Irish Catholic growing up in Northern Ireland
[still colonized by Britain), and then lived in London where he could witness exactly
the phenomena tackled by Essed and Goldberg, and their contributing authors.149
Cannon responded:
It mostly stems from personal experience in the sense that I grew up during “the Troubles” in Northern Ireland in the 1970s and 1980s and was conscious of issues of discrimination along religious lines. I was also interested in music and followed the great anti–racist battles in London in the punk and new wave era. Finally, I worked in London during much of the Thatcher era—for seven years in local government— where the issue of race was salient, especially in the inner city areas where I lived and worked. Issues of racial discrimination and identity were at the forefront of thinking in the Labour controlled borough councils where I worked. All these experiences made me sensitive to the question of race within wider political economy contexts. When I began to study Venezuela I noticed that it was sometimes alluded to but rarely addressed in work on Chávez and the Bolivarian Revolution. When I did my field work there in 2002 I felt that much of the objections to Chávez coming from opposition groups had subtle racist– and classist– connotations. That is why I tried to tackle it, first in my 2004 article in Bulletin of Latin American Research and then later and more directly in my 2008 article in Third World Quarterly. It is still an area I'm interested in and I hope to work on it again at some time. I hope this answers your question.150
In the first chapter, I wrote about the familiarity that I felt that I had
with Chávez because of my own struggles that arose from this notion of race,
especially when one is non–European in a Eurocentric world. As Frantz Fanon
discussed, the problems of identifying with both the colonizer and the colonized
make it necessary to de–Eurocentrize and de–colonize a way of life that for
centuries has “epidermalized” a status of inferiority in people of color. According to 149. Philomena Essed and David Theo Goldberg, Race Critical Theories: Text and Context (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004). 150. Barry Cannon, e-‐mail message to author, February 7, 2014.
76
Victor Figueroa,151 only a radical transformation could be counted on to make the
kind of changes necessary to accomplish this. Quijano agrees with him and writes
that revolution must be directed against the entire spectrum of domination—
against the whole of the dominating power. These writers, therefore, view radical
revolution as one way for Latin Americans to throw off the effects of slavery,
colonialism, Eurocentrism, globalization, neoliberalism, and racism. Hugo Chávez,
the kid from the plains of Venezuela, who was called “ugly” as a child growing up,
absorbed all these aspects of race that have played out in Venezuela for the past 500
years, and overcome them in order to become the leader that we know him as today.
Liberation of the Oppressed and Its Influence on Chávez
Many see Hugo Chávez as a Liberator following the same trajectory as his
beloved Simon Bolivar. But, before he could liberate others, he had to liberate
himself and see himself through eyes freed from the shame internalized as a result
of European domination.
Theories of liberation and resistance became particularly prominent during
the periods of resistance to colonialism. Frantz Fanon and Paulo Freire feature
prominently in this literature. Because of the fervor of the times, the clamor for
freedom and decolonization by those dominated by European oppression sparked
revolutionary imagination of liberation that swept the colonized world. Frantz
Fanon and Paulo Freire, giants in the liberation literature, undoubtedly had an
impact on a younger Hugo Chávez. Their thoughts permeated the colonized world, 151. See Victor M. Figueroa, “The Bolivarian Government of Hugo Chávez: Democratic Alternative for Latin America?” Critical Sociology 32, no. 1 (2006): 187–211.
77
including Latin America and the Caribbean. As a young military officer, Chávez also
read Muammar Qaddafi’s The Green Book. I will conclude this section with a brief
mention of The Green Book and of C.L.R. James’s book, Black Jacobins, also a primer
for revolutionary leadership in the region.
Hugo Chávez had heroes and he spoke of them often. Of course, we know that
Simon Bolivar was his hero, and he named his movement after him; but Chávez
entered the military academy with The Diary of Ché Guevara tucked underneath his
arm and read Muammar Qaddafi’s The Green Book while in military academy,
according to Marcano and Tyszka. Consideration of Latin American liberation must
include the pivotal figure of Ché Guevara. However, any discussion of race and class
liberation must include Frantz Fanon and Paulo Freire.
Free Your Mind and the Rest Will Follow?
Frantz Fanon and Paulo Freire make it abundantly clear that mental
liberation is the precursor to physical and political liberation. In the colonized
setting, such identity work is critical to becoming free. And one cannot free others
without first freeing oneself—as much as is possible within the given circumstances.
Frantz Fanon (1925 – 1961), born in Martinique (a French colony) and a
trained psychiatrist, stands at the intersection of identity work, race, and
colonialism. He wrote that all colonized people have an inferiority complex. This is a
result of the colonial experience, which amounts to systemic dehumanization that is
not accidental, but is part of the structure of colonialism. Fanon wrote that our
participation in this structure contributes to our further dehumanization. Thus,
78
colonialism and its violence worked on both the European colonizer and the
non–European colonized.
Fanon supported the Algerian War of Independence from France and became
a revolutionary post–colonial theorist who focused on the psychological effects on
individuals of colonialism. He collected his data through the lived experiences of not
only himself as a colonized Black man in Martinique and France, but also during his
psychiatric practice in Algeria and Tunisia during Algeria’s War of Independence. In
his two epic writings, Black Skin White Masks and Wretched of the Earth, Fanon
detailed his observations on the damaging impacts of French colonialism and racism
on the colonized identity and that of the colonizer.
Black Skin, White Masks152 is a phenomenological excursion through the lived
experiences of Fanon and others. In it he tries to understand the Black/White
relationship by exploring the psychology of racism and colonialism. He also wrote
about the role of violence in the liberation struggle and the Eurocentrism of the field
of psychoanalysis. He begins his philosophy of decolonization by describing the
psychological harm of colonialism, noting importantly, that colonizers have
psychological damage, too.
Fanon noticed that language is important and then recorded that Black skin
amounts to impurity in the way it is seen and the language that is used. Internalizing
this attitude leads to self–hatred. This, in turn, leads to bizarre behavior, an example
of which he calls “lactification.” To Fanon, lactification occurs when Black women
152. Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks, trans. Charles Lam Markmann (New York: Grove Park Press, 1967). The work was originally published in French in 1952 under the title Peau Nore, Masques Blancs.
79
seek out White men as partners.153 Another example of such behavior is the anxiety
felt by Blacks when in the presence of Whites: the fear of revealing any inferiority or
stereotypical behavior. Fanon says that this leads to one thinking of one’s Black self
as White, hence, the title, Black Skin, White Masks.
Fanon detailed the identity issues created by colonialism. He said that the
Black man wants to be White; some Whites consider themselves superior to Blacks;
some Blacks feel the need to prove their intellect to Whites. He believed that the
Black person who tries to “whiten” the race “is as wretched as the one who preaches
hatred of the White man.”154
Fanon writes about the “disalienation” from the dominant—that is
European—culture for the victim of colonialism and the “epidermalization of
inferiority.” This disalienation arises from being called “Black rabble,” and the
multiple complexes created by colonialism. Colonialism, according to Fanon,
discards one’s local culture “to the grave” and attempts to move the mind of the
victim of colonialism closer to the culture of the metropole, or colonizing country.
Colonialism defines the Black man as the “missing link” between humans and apes.
Analysis of this condition allows for its destruction. Therefore, one purpose of Black
Skin, White Masks was the liberation of the Black person from him or herself. Fanon
wrote: “We believe the juxtaposition of the Black and White races has resulted in a
massive psycho–existential complex. By analyzing it we aim to destroy it.”155
153. For a discussion of Fanon and feminism see T. Denean Sharpley-‐Whiting, Frantz Fanon: Conflicts and Feminisms (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1998). 154. Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks, Introduction. 155. Ibid., Introduction.
80
In Wretched of the Earth,156 written in 1961 during the Algerian War of
Independence, Fanon developed his ideas further on the decolonization process. For
Fanon, colonialism was conceived in violence, maintained through violence, and
could only be removed through violence. For Fanon, it was through this violent
process that the colonized psyche would be liberated. He writes that the colonized
liberate themselves by way of violence and that it is this action which illuminates
both the appropriate method and the goal. He notes, “Every colonized subject” can
imagine “blow[ing] the colonial world to smithereens.”157 Finally, Fanon believed
that a decolonized world would open up the possibility of a new humanity and a
new humanism. The goal of the anti–colonial struggle was to replace one type of
mankind with another.
Post–colonial theorist Homi Bhabha wrote in his foreword to the 2004
edition of Fanon’s Wretched of the Earth:
Is his [Fanon’s] impassioned plea that ‘the Third World must start over a new history of man’ merely a vain hope? Does such a lofty ideal represent anything more than the lost rhetorical baggage of that daunting quest for a nonaligned postcolonial world inaugurated at the Bandung Conference in 1955? Who can claim that dream now? Who still waits in the antechamber of history? Did Fanon’s ideas die with the decline and dissolution of the Black Power movement in America, buried with Steve Biko in South Africa, or were they born again when the Berlin Wall was dismembered and a new South Africa took its place on the world’s stage? Questions, questions. 158
My answer to Bhabha’s question is: no! Fanon’s ideas did not die when Steve
Biko was murdered in South Africa while in police custody. In 2005, Vijay Prashad
156. Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth, trans. Richard Philcox (New York, NY: Grove Press, 2007). This work was originally published in France under the title Damnés de la Terre. 157. Ibid., 5. 158. Homi K. Bhabha, “Foreword” in Fanon, Wretched of the Earth, xxi.
81
wrote that the Third World did not build international institutions strong enough to
withstand U.S. global economic integration schemes.159 Charlie Samuya Veric
updates that thought with his recent description of how the Third World Project
failed.160 The Third World is the name given to the non–European colonized world.
According to Veric, the Third World Project was birthed by Frantz Fanon after the
historic Bandung Conference of 1955 brought together the countries and liberation
movements whose populations were victims of European colonialism,
neocolonialism, or apartheid. Veric writes about the estrangement, even in academe,
of that liberation project through its marginalization of José Maria Sison, one of the
architects of decolonizing thought and the author of Struggle for National
Democracy. Sison was a Philippines independence activist who is still alive, yet has
not taught in post–colonial studies programs. Veric sees Fanon, Sison, and Paulo
Freire as foundational to understanding the Third World Project, and defines this as
a new and living map of the planet. Veric writes that Fanon was deeply affected by
the U.S.–supported assassination 161 of Congo’s first democratically–elected Prime
Minister, Patrice Lumumba.162 He recalls that Lumumba’s fate, as well as Nkrumah’s
Ghana, served as backdrops for Fanon’s Wretched of the Earth. For Veric, the Third
159. Vijay Prashad, “American Grand Strategy and the Assassination of the Third World,” Critical Asian Studies 37, no. 1 (2005): 117–127. 160. Charlie Samuya Veric, “Third World Project, or How Poco Failed,” Social Text 114 31, no. 1 (2013): 1–20. 161. For more on the U.S. role in the assassination of Lumumba, see Stephen R. Weissman, “An Extraordinary Rendition,” Intelligence and National Security 25, no. 2 (2010): 198–222. 162. See Appendix C for a fuller discussion of Patrice Lumumba and the recent U.S. admission of its policy to assassinate Patrice Lumumba.
82
World project is not dead and will not die as long as “unfreedom” exists in the Third
World as a result of globalization.
Another pillar in freeing oneself—liberating oneself from oppression and
then liberating others—centers on the idea of “consciencism.” In January 1964,
Kwame Nkrumah published his ideas on how to restore the African conscience,
ripped apart and strewn far away from the continent as a result of colonialism in his
book, Consciencism.163 In 1968 in Portuguese, and in 1970 in English, Paulo Freire
published his ideas on the role of conscientizaçao in the liberation of all who are
oppressed in Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 164
Veric, like Pablo Martins, agreed that Paulo Freire was affected by Fanon’s
work. In a study of the confluence of ideas between Fanon and Freire, Pablo Martins
writes that the influence of Fanon on Freire and all of Latin America is palpable.165
In his powerful book on the dehumanizing nature of oppression, Pedagogy of the
Oppressed, Freire wrote a prescription of action to end oppression. He began by
declaring that a new underclass had been created; he later denounced
neoliberalism, for the same reason.166 Freire was careful on race, denouncing
racism, but also noting that race was not monolithic and that some from an
163. Kwame Nkrumah, Consciencism: Philosophy and Ideology for Decolonization and Development with Particular Reference to the African Revolution (New York: Monthly Press, 1964). 164. Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Thirtieth Anniversary Edition (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2012). 165. For more on the similarities between Freire and Fanon, see Pablo Martins, “Confluencias entre el Pensamiento de Frantz Fanon y el de Paulo Freire: El Surgimiento de la Educacion Popular en el Marco de la Situacion Colonial,” Educaçao 37, no. 2 (2012): 241–256, doi:10.5902/198464443250. 166. Freire specifically wrote of neoliberalism in Pedagogy of the Heart (New York: Continuum International, 1997).
83
oppressed group could join the class of the oppressor, as we saw earlier with Azad’s
work on the comprador class.
According to Freire, dialogue was a method of knowing that led to the
oppressed having a conviction for freedom. In fact, for Freire, dialogue was the only
way in which the oppressed could come to understand and express their own
reality. In education, this meant a rejection of a system of teaching that stifled rather
than encouraged critical analysis and creativity. Dialogue–based education, then,
was the route to freedom by way of conscientizaçao or critical consciousness.
Critical consciousness was the ability to see political, social, and economic
contradictions. One could not be free without this awareness. The reason? Because,
according to Freire, once one was critically conscious, one could not remain passive
in the face of the oppressor’s violence. Critical consciousness also created Subjects—
that is, individuals who act to eliminate oppression. Critical consciousness created
“knowledge in solidarity with action and vice versa.”167
Freire believed that the liberation struggle of the oppressed actually also
liberates the oppressor. He warned, however, that in order to engage in this
struggle, the oppressed would have to shed the internalized images of themselves
that have been adopted from the point of view of the oppressor. Hauntingly
reminiscent of Fanon, Freire wrote, “Freedom is acquired by conquest, not by
gift.”168 And part of that conquest would have to be over one’s own fears and
feelings of inferiority and self–doubt that have been well–honed by the oppressor.
167. Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 38. 168. Ibid., 47.
84
Therefore, for Freire, the first stage of this liberating pedagogy was consciousness
because consciousness would lead to action.
Also, powerfully and importantly, Freire delineated the mechanisms used by
the oppressor: conquest, divide and rule (of which class conflict played a role),
manipulation, and cultural invasion. The antidote to these mechanisms is
cooperation, unity for liberation, organization, and cultural synthesis—by which he
meant cultural action that overcame the alienating culture of the oppressor. Freire
wrote that all authentic revolutions are cultural revolutions. He offered these
thoughts as a theory of liberating action to counter the theory of oppressive action
that is the reality faced by the oppressed every day until they ignite the struggle for
freedom in themselves.
Ché Guevara
Ché was an Argentinian guerrilla leader who was also trained as a medical
doctor. He was Fidel Castro’s lieutenant and helped in the armed, revolutionary
overthrow of the –backed Fulgencio Batista dictatorship in Cuba. Guevara traveled
the Third World, even going as far away as to Congo, where he met with Laurent
Desiré Kabila, later to become Congo’s President who would later be assassinated.
Ché said that the revolutionary, Marxist forces of the world should help both the
people of Vietnam and the people of Congo repel imperialism’s thrust.169 His aim
was to create “one, two, three Vietnams” with which, he believed, imperialism could
not successfully contend. This belief took him to Bolivia where he was captured and 169. For Che Guevara’s speech at the Afro-‐Asian Conference held February 24, 1965, see “At the Afro-‐Asian Conference in Algeria” in Che Guevara Reader, ed. David Deutschmann (North Melbourne, Australia: Ocean Press, 2005), 340–349. Also available online at http://www.marxists.org/archive/guevara/1965/02/24.htm.
85
assassinated. With access to the Chávez personal diary, Marcano and Tyszka note a
variant of Guevara’s famous inscription in the page margins: “Vietnam. One and two
Vietnams in Latin America.”170 Perhaps this is an important window into Chávez’s
future rejection of U.S. imperialism. Ché Guevara did not have to die so soon, nor did
he have to live his life as a revolutionary, but his desire to liberate the poor people of
Latin America was so intense that he forsook all in order to accomplish this goal. Ché
Guevara is an example in action of Cabral’s theory of the “class suicide” necessary in
successful revolution. He wrote his own epitaph, which appeared in 1967 in The
Guardian obituary of him: " Wherever death may surprise us, let it be welcome,
provided that this our battle cry may have reached some receptive ear and another
hand may be extended to wield our weapons."171 In 1997, Guevara’s remains were
repatriated to Cuba, along with those of six of his compatriots where they are now
housed in a monument and mausoleum in Santa Clara, Cuba, the site of Guevara’s
military victory in the Cuban Revolution.
Amilcar Cabral
Chávez spoke of Amilcar Cabral who used armed struggle to rid the African
Continent of the Portuguese colonial presence. Therefore, in order to fully
appreciate Hugo Chávez’s legacy on race and his race–conscious leadership, I believe
a discussion is necessitated on the political leadership of liberation and resistance.
But first, how does one become personally free so as to help begin the process of
freeing others? Both Ché Guevara and Amilcar Cabral used armed resistance. In his 170. Marcano and Tyszka, Hugo Chávez, 39. 171. Richard Bourne, “Che Guevera, Marxist Architect of Revolution,” The Guardian, October 10, 1967, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/19/che-‐guevara-‐obituary-‐guardian-‐archive.
86
press conference after the failed coup attempt Chávez asked his co–conspirators to
lay down their weapons, but por ahora, leaving open resort to armed resistance in
the future. After all, Chávez was the first in South America to bring revolution
through the ballot box.
Amilcar Cabral initiated, along with Sekou Touré of Guinea, a project to rid
Africans of the destructive personal and national effects of colonialism and
Eurocentrism. According to Cabral, this would be accomplished by way of a return
to African centered life principles—such as communalism and democratic,
transparent, and collective leadership.172 According to Hotep, this is an example of
African Centered Leadership–Followership, which Hotep views as a Pan–Africanist
leadership typology that follows the form of Servant Leadership as theorized by
Robert Greenleaf. Cabral was an African leader who actually produced freedom for
African people. Cabral, a prolific writer, developed an ideology of liberation and a
theory of socialist revolution from his experiences leading the anti–Portuguese
colonialism struggle in Guinea–Bissau and Cape Verde. His theory of socialist
revolution in the Guinea–Bissau and Cape Verde setting was more about grassroots
mobilization than theory borrowed from another place and time that was not
applicable to the situation in Cape Verde and Guinea–Bissau. From his experience on
the ground in Guinea–Bissau and Cape Verde, he realized that the revolution and
freedom would come from the peasants and not proletarians.
172. For more on African Centered Leadership-‐Followership, see Uhuru Hotep, “African Centered Leadership-‐Followership: Foundational Principles, Precepts, and Essential Practices,” Journal of Pan African Studies 3, no. 6 (2010): 11–26.
87
Cabral’s thought and practice had to straddle the peculiar race/class/mestizo
issues that were a part of Portuguese colonialism.173 Cabral also understood that
transformational change would occur only with the mobilization of not just the
peasants in the countryside, but also with a broad swath of the internal classes that
could be aligned with the forces and interests of imperialism. Therefore, it was
important, to Cabral, to understand tactical places of contradiction among
supporters of imperialism, while using education to iron out differences among the
colonized. This would produce an “organic leadership” of peasants and workers and
the petty bourgeoisie united behind an ideology for political transformation.
Cabral’s notion of the necessity of “class suicide” is inherent in this multi–class path
to liberation. This combination of several classes working toward the same goal of
liberation contains, according to Cabral, a kernel of class suicide: for the revolution
to succeed, the petty bourgeoisie will have to set aside its class interest for the
national interest. Leadership with moral courage, collective and individual, would be
able to provide the necessary ideology, consciousness, and inspiration for this to
occur.
For Cabral, that uniting ideology of liberation for Guinea–Bissauians and
Cape Verdeans was nationalism and its material benefits. The goal of Cabral’s armed
struggle was the complete liberation of the people. And because the people were
primary, those in the liberation struggle should always remember not to veer onto
the road of militarism. Cabral wrote:
173. For more on Cabral’s Marxist approach to leadership and liberation, see Timothy W. Luke, “Cabral’s Marxism: An African Strategy for Socialist Development,” Studies in Comparative Communism 14, no. 4 (1981): 307–330.
88
I swear that I will give my life, all my energy and all my courage, all the capacity that I have as a man, until the day that I die, to the service of my people, in Guinea and Cape Verde. To the service of the cause of humanity, to make my contribution, with the means possible, for the life of man to become better in the world. This is what my work is.174
Amilcar Cabral was assassinated on January 20, 1973. Cabral’s experience is
instructive because Cabral had to delicately navigate a terrain similar to that of
Chávez in Venezuela. According to Reiland Rabaka: “Cabral’s theoretic–strategic
framework is extremely useful for those critical theorists concerned not merely with
colonialism, neocolonialism, and postcolonialism, but also racism, critical race
theory, revolutionary nationalism, revolutionary humanism, re–Africanization, and
the critique of capitalism and class struggles in contemporary society.”175
Muammar Qaddafi and the Green Book
According to Marcano and Tyszka, The Green Book was one of the
basic texts Chávez and his military co–conspirators used before the 1992 attempt to
overthrow Chávez’s fellow, but corrupt, military leaders and the equally
unsatisfactory civilian leadership. The Green Book was written by Muammar Qaddafi
as an explanation of his theories and philosophies that would eventually see the
withering away of the State in favor of direct, popular democracy. According to
Marcano and Tyszka, many Latin American military traveled to Libya to meet and
learn from the experiences of Muammar Qaddafi, new leader of Libya. One of the 174. Amilcar Cabral, Revolution in Guinea: An African People’s Struggle (London: Stage One, 1969), 72. Quoted in Peter Karibe Mendy, “Amilcar Cabral and the Liberation of Guinea-‐Bissau: Context, Challenges and Lessons for Effective African Leadership,” African Identities 4, no. 1 (2006): 19, doi:10.1080/14725840500268440. 175. Reiland Rabaka, “Weapon of Theory: Amilcar Cabral and the Weapon of Critical Theory” in Claim No Easy Victories: The Legacy of Amilcar Cabral, eds. Firoze Manji and Bill Fletcher, Jr. (Dakar, Senegal: CODESRIA/Daraja Press, 2013), 109–127.
89
1992 coup co–conspirators with Chávez was even chosen to travel there. Therefore,
according to Marcano and Tyszka, The Green Book was a foundational text for the
Venezuelan officers group.
The Green Book was written in three Parts. Qaddafi called its contents his
“Third Universal Theory.”176Part One, entitled “The Solution of the Problem of
Democracy,” laid out Qaddafi’s view of the central problem of government facing the
people at that time. He wrote that parliaments were only representations, and
therefore subject to misrepresentations of the will of the people. Political parties
presented the same problem in that the will of the people should be indivisible, but
political parties only represented certain people. Qaddafi wrote that the best means
of ascertaining the will of the people was to actually ask them and that true
democracy was based on the participation in decision–making of all of the people—
popular democracy. Therefore, the people should be organized so as to consider
questions of governance and appropriation of funds. Thus, according to The Green
Book, the basis for government was the authority of the people. Hence, the name of
the Libyan government after the overthrow of the monarchy was Jamahiriya, which
in Arabic means nation of the masses of the people. The Green Book, then, advocated
direct democracy as the surest form of obtaining the authority of the people.
Part Two of The Green Book spoke to the place of wage–earners and domestic
servants in society. Entitled, “The Solution of the Economic Problem,” Part Two
describes the problems engendered by wages and capitalism. Its basic 176. Copies of The Green Book, that were available for free in Embassies of the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya around the world, were destroyed by the United States-‐backed group that overthrew that Government. It is available online at http://www.mathaba.net/gci/theory/gb.htm.
90
understanding is that those who actually did the work were the real producers;
therefore, producers should take over production. Hence, socialism was seen as the
solution to the economic problems encountered by Libyans as the Revolution
needed to deepen. Qaddafi also spelled out in The Green Book that people would be
liberated and happy when their basic needs were met. Those basic needs were
described as food, housing, clothing, land, and transportation. Wealth disparities
and exploitation of others were not to be tolerated and surpluses that were
generated accrued to the society at large. This meant that the masses of the people
shared in both the authority of the country (Part One) and in its wealth (Part Two).
Part Three of The Green Book proclaimed that the nation was the umbrella
under which the tribe and the family were made secure, and that a state may consist
of many nations whose natural inclination is to be free. Qaddafi also spoke to the
role of women in Part Three and stated that they are different from males, but are
equal. Part Three also states that education is equivalent to freedom and that no one
should have the right to deny anyone access to knowledge. He also wrote that the
rights of minorities should be observed whether they were inside a state or were
stateless. In The Green Book, Muammar Qaddafi recognized that history is made by
mass movements that seek recognition for the identity of an oppressed group.
Despite the prevailing situation of Black people in the world, his belief was that
Black people will eventually triumph on the world stage. This is what Chávez and his
cohort of revolutionaries in Venezuela were reading. Muammar Qaddafi was
assassinated on October 20, 2011 during –orchestrated bombings of Libya to
overthrow its Jamahiriya government.
91
The Black Jacobins, Toussaint L’Ouverture, and the Haitian Revolution
C.L.R. James, a Trinidadian, published the book, The Black Jacobins: Toussaint
L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution,177 in 1938. It is a history of the Haitian
Revolution set in the context of the French Revolution. The book was received with
critical acclaim and James came to be considered one of the great thinkers on human
emancipation. He is also considered to be one of the fathers of Pan–Africanism.
James noted that the West Indian identity was born with the Haitian Revolution.
And that the French call for liberty, equality and fraternity was heard all the way on
the island of Hispaniola by the enslaved Africans, colonized by the French
themselves. James envisioned The Black Jacobins as a harbinger of things to come
elsewhere in the world.
James attributes the initial impetus and organization of the Haitian
Revolution to the leadership of Toussaint L’Ouverture who was a slave until he was
forty–five years old. L’Ouverture was a teacher and also a learner, but it was the
masses whose desire to be free that made L’Ouverture. James wrote, “Great men
make history, but only such history as it is possible for them to make. Their freedom
of achievement is limited by the necessities of their environment.”178 James also
believed that the people of the Caribbean needed unity; he believed that they lived
in the twentieth century, but under Seventeenth Century economic conditions. His
prescription was unification; he recommended a federation of the whole of the
Caribbean, to include all of the islands and countries of the littoral, regardless of
177. C.L.R. James, The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution (New York: Vintage Books, 1989). 178. James, Black Jacobins, x.
92
language.179 He believed that the basis of everything that promoted change was the
mass movement. At the same time, James presented Black Jacobins as a political
contest and the story of the rise and fall of a great leader: Toussaint L’Ouverture
ended slavery in Haiti, but died while in custody in France. It was at this point, James
writes, that Jean–Jacques Dessalines enters the scene. It is Dessalines who declared
Haiti’s independence from France in 1804.
James broke with the Communist line on how the workers’ revolution was to
occur and demonstrated in his book on Haiti that revolutions can occur in contexts
other than those predicted by Marx. He met with Trotsky in order to understand the
place of Blacks within that part of the movement; but, according to James, Trotsky
failed to answer a single question that he posed on the matter of race.180 James
understood that race and class were not the same thing in the Caribbean setting and
contended that he could not allow race to be subsumed into the issue of class. The
Haitian Revolution, he believed, was the beginning of the colonial upheavals. He
wrote of the barbarity of slavery, which the Africans in Haiti endured: “The difficulty
was that though one could trap them like animals, transport them in pens, work
them alongside an ass or a horse and beat both with the same stick, stable them and
starve them, they remained, despite their black skins and curly hair, quite invincibly
179. Some of the speeches can be watched and heard on “C.L.R. James (West Indian Writer and Activist), YouTube video, 6:38, posted by “Afrikanliberation," July 22, 2009, https://www.y.com/watch?v=viwYx3uIYiU. 180. An interview of C.L.R. James conducted by critical theorist, Stuart Hall, can be viewed at “In Conversation with Stuart Hall,” 51:51, posted by “susie2010ism,” April 19, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gf0KUxgZfI.
93
human beings…The slaves worked on the land, and like revolutionary peasants
everywhere, they aimed at the extermination of their oppressors.”181
In a preface, James explained his intent: “The writer has sought not only to
analyze, but to demonstrate in their movement, the economic forces of the age; their
molding of society and politics, of men in the mass and individual men; the powerful
reaction of these on their environment at one of those rare moments when society is
at a boiling point and therefore fluid.”182 George Ciccariello–Maher in his book, We
Created Chávez, captures this moment in Venezuela when society was at a boiling
point and the politics became very fluid. That story, too, is of movements and men:
the Caracazo and Chávez were both symptom and product as had been the Haitian
slave rebellion and Toussaint L’Ouverture.
Resistance Theory and New Ways of Resisting
In many ways, Chávez’s leadership was also about the positive
affirmation of a new identity—one forged from the process of resistance. This
approach is straight from Fanon and Freire, whose ideas will be revisited here after
a brief discussion on Resistance and Liberation Theories in general.
Resistance Theory is a form of political thought that discusses oppositional
behavior to power and that has social or political purpose. Resistance can
sometimes even be viewed as not only politically necessary behavior, but also as
181. James, Black Jacobins, 11, 85. 182. Ibid., x–xi.
94
morally necessary behavior. Therefore, resistance is also an act that communicates
to others one’s position and creates a community of like–minded actors.183
Some theorists derive their thinking about resistance from Hobbes. Glenn
Burgess is one who writes that Hobbesian resistance rests on three pillars: the right
of the individual to protect his life; the responsibility of the people for the actions of
power; and the consequences for power when it acts in evil or wickedness.184 If one
believes that power starts from below and is popular consent, then resistance to
power is non–cooperation with power malpractice and disobedience from below.
Stellan Vinthagen185 sees power as subordination and resistance as insubordination.
Borrowing from Foucault, Vinthagen asserts that power comes in many forms—and
so too does resistance. With this as background, a look at resistance in Latin
America is useful.
Liberation Theology is perhaps the best–known form of Latin American
resistance from priests and nuns in the Catholic Church. These clerical activists
often were opposed by the Church hierarchy locally and in Rome. Practitioners of
Liberation Theology took a stand on behalf of the poor and marginalized and many
paid the ultimate price for doing so. One was Catholic Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo
Romero who openly opposed U.S.–supported genocide in El Salvador where
183. Although her focus is on education, Kathleen Knight Abowitz gives a good backgrounding on resistance theory in “A Pragmatist Revisioning of Resistance Theory,” American Educational Research Journal 37, no. 4 (2000): 877–907, doi:10.3102/00028312037004877. 184. Glenn Burgess, “On Hobbesian Resistance Theory,” Political Studies 42, no. 1 (1994): 62–83, doi:10.1111/j.1467-‐9248.1994.tb01674.x. 185. Stellan Vinthagen, “Power As Subordination and Resistance As Disobedience: Non-‐violent Movements and the Management of Power,” Asian Journal of Social Science 34, no. 1 (2006): 1–21, doi:10.1163/156853106776150207.
95
approximately three thousand people per month were being killed.186 On March 24,
1980, Archbishop Romero was murdered in public while leading Mass. Months later,
on December 2, 1980, four Maryknoll nuns in El Salvador were raped and murdered
by death squads. Liberation Theology seeks to read the Bible through the eyes of the
poor. The path to justice, then, was to oppose those structures of injustice wherever
they appeared.187
George Leddy focuses on new ways of resisting in the globalized world of the
twenty–first century.188 Assassination was a factor in the cases of Cabral, Ché,
Torrijos, Qaddafi, Romero, the Maryknoll nuns, and others. Some of the United
States’ assassination attempts on Fidel Castro have been documented in declassified
U.S. Government documents.
Leddy points out that there are now many ways to resist. He writes that
globalization led to the creation of new forms of resistance, both violent and
non–violent. While taking an inventory of resistance movements in Latin America,
he writes that protracted violence is a form of resistance in Colombia, while the
Zapatista “Other Campaign” sought to unite various groups representing
marginalized populations in Mexico. Leddy believes that neoliberalism and
globalization have changed the nature of the types of resistance needed in Latin
186. For an explanation of U.S. military support in an “anti-‐Communist” environment, see Paul P. Cale, “The United States Military Advisory Group in El Salvador, 1979–1992,” Small Wars Journal, www.smallwarsjournal.com/documents/ cale.pdf. 187. For a discussion of Liberation Theology rooted in religious texts, see James M. Dawsey, “Liberation Theology and Economic Development,” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 60, no. 5 (2001): 203–212, doi:10.1111/1536-‐7150.00145. 188. George Leddy, “New Structures for Capital and Forms of Resistance,” Latin American Perspectives 40, no. 5 (2013): 5–13, doi:10.1177/0094582X13497927.
96
America. He says that neoliberalism’s policies of outsourcing and privatization have
led to migration from Latin American states just for survival and dignity. This has
caused a new kind of racism, according to Leddy. Furthermore, neoliberalism feeds
off that forced migration and shifts the main source of foreign exchange income of
many Latin American states to financial services, a sector that only entrenches the
wealth of the elite and immiserates everyone else.
Finally, Leddy points to social participation as a Latin American strategy of
resistance that has resulted in an increase in democracy. He also points to the Banco
del Sur as an example of a new form of resistance—in counterpoint to the neoliberal
structural adjustment mandates that come from the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) when countries borrow money. The structural adjustment mandates from the
IMF normally result in price increases of staple foodstuffs, foreign ownership of
state entities, and massive job loss. Thus, Leddy offers as examples of new forms of
resistance the mobilization of the masses and alternative institutional structures
with different developmental goals. He acknowledges that the new identity that is
being formed in Latin America leads to a new way of thinking which also leads to a
new way of resisting.
Battling the United States: When Transformational Leadership Becomes Leadership on the Line
Hugo Chávez was not the only leader who championed his Africanness and
tried to right the wrongs of colonialism and the centuries–long trafficking and
enslavement of Africans, acknowledged by the United Nations in 2001 to be a crime
against humanity. But Chávez was the first national leader to do so from the South
American continent. In so doing, Chávez qualified himself as a transformational
97
leader. He transformed the shame of being Black (Indigenous or African) into a
source of pride for one’s thick lips or for a woman’s straight black hair, culminating
in a movement that continues to exercise power today in Venezuela.
There is a tradition of such struggle, against colonialism, slavery, and mental
slavery, including against the more modern manifestations of those systems of
oppression. Coming straight from colonialism to political independence, President of
Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah called the new form of colonialism that he confronted,
neocolonialism. Neocolonialism had to be fought as vigorously as colonialism
because the lack of independence and freedom was still the hallmark of the
post–colonial period.
A.B. Assensoh investigates the leadership of Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, along
with that of Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, and Kenya’s Jomo Kenyatta. These three are
considered African Founding Fathers who transformed a continent. In African
Political Leadership189 Assensoh presents the trio as exemplars of African leadership
comparing Nkrumah, Kenyatta, and Nyerere, notably in regard to the status of
women, heath care and education. Promotion by the states they led came through
Nyerere’s non–Marxist socialism, and, in the case of Nkrumah, a fervent
Pan–Africanism.
Assensoh posits that Africa’s foremost problem today is its lack of leadership
practice. Assensoh counts Nyerere, Kenyatta, and Nkrumah as African leadership
exemplars despite their difficulties and imperfect records. He holds them up as
examples of African Political Leadership worthy of emulation. All lived long lives 189. A.B. Assensoh, African Political Leadership (Malabar, FL: Krieger, 1998).
98
and experienced the taste of their success. For political leadership that leads
powerful change, that is not always the case. As we now know, Hugo Chávez died on
March 5, 2013 after a long bout with cancer that was discovered in 2010. When
Chávez died, he was fifty–eight years of age. Yet he shared some characteristics that
will be examined in the fourth chapter with those African leaders.
Leadership on the Line: Fidel Castro and Omar Torrijos
Fidel had invited Chávez to Cuba after the latter’s release from prison for his
role in the 1992 attempted coup in Venezuela. The two hit it off immediately and
remained close until the end of Chávez’s life. While in military academy, Chávez had
the opportunity to meet the son of Omar Torrijos, the nationalist military
Commander of the Panamanian National Guard. Torrijos is best known as the Latin
American leader who regained the Panama Canal for Panama. Marcano and Tyszka
relate how proud the Venezuelans felt to meet the Torrijos son and that they all sat
around, Venezuelan military cadets and Panamanian, reveling in the Panamanian
Revolution. Marcano and Tsyzka write that Torrijos headed a nationalist
government that ended the lock on the economy that the elite had enjoyed in
Panamanian politics. They indicate that the talk about Torrijos taking back the Canal
from the United States made a great impact on Chávez.190 These two revolutionary
leaders put their lives and their leadership on the line in their struggle for freedom
from the yoke of the United States. As a cadet, Chávez spoke of himself as a
Torrijist.191
190. Marcano and Tyszka, Hugo Chávez, 35–36. 191. Ibid.
99
We know the extent to which these revolutionary Latin American leaders put
their leadership on the line because of the reports written by the Senate Select
Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities
(hereafter referred to as the Church Committee, named after its Chair) and from
John Perkins’ Confessions of an Economic Hitman.192 The Church Committee outlined
the –sponsored assassination plots against Fidel Castro beginning with Castro’s
treatment in the U.S. media. Castro was seen as a charismatic leader and the CIA
wanted to destroy that image. Of attempts on the life of Fidel Castro, the Church
Committee wrote: “We have found concrete evidence of at least eight plots involving
the CIA to assassinate Fidel Castro from 1960 to 1965.”193 The Committee also found
that the U.S. Government sought information on Raul Castro, assuming he would
succeed his brother, Fidel, in case the latter had an “ ‘accident’ to neutralize this
leader’s influence.” Raul Castro is Cuba’s current leader.
John Perkins was assigned to also research Omar Torrijos and says that
Torrijos was killed because he was a nationalist who would not yield to U.S.
interests in negotiations for a larger canal. Perkins says that Torrijos knew that the
whole world was watching him because of the Panama Canal and his demand that it
be turned over to the Panamanians. Perkins said that the concern of the U.S.
Government was that Torrijos would set an example that others were bound to
192. John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hitman (San Francisco: Berrett-‐Koehler, 2004). 193. U.S. Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities. Interim Report, 71, http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/ reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0043a.htm. Note: in subsequent footnotes this Committee will be referred to as “Church Committee.”
100
follow. Perkins explains that his job was to either bribe Torrijos, in order to get him
to accept huge loans that would bankrupt the country, or assassinate him if he
refused such bribes. Perkins says that these leaders were all aware of the history
and they knew that it had happened before. Perkins even describes the manner in
which Torrijos was killed: he had been handed a tape recorder that had a bomb in it.
Perkins says that he was personally aware of what happened. Such was the end of
Hugo Chávez’s hero, Omar Torrijos.194
Thus, Fidel Castro and Omar Torrijos had different outcomes personally with
respect to their longevity, but both successfully challenged the United States for the
dignity and independence of their countries. They both constitute classic examples
of the kind of transformational leadership that knowingly courts danger. In my
opinion, this is the kind of leadership also exemplified by Chávez, who challenged
the United States, despite knowing well that such a challenge was fraught with
danger. Therefore, I believe that Hugo Chávez was not just a transformational
leader, but also a unique transformational leader—and one who practiced
Parrhesia, as we now discuss.
Parrhesia
Another type of leadership that involves risk and outspokenness is called
Parrhesia. The word Parrhesia has different meanings: one is in the ancient Greek
sense of free speech, from which the word is derived. The other meaning of “bold
194. For an interview of Perkins, see “Ex-‐Economic Hit Man John Perkins in Panama,” YouTube video, 4:11, posted by Alan Duke, October 8, 2009, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiQsmgaBkzw.
101
speech” is used in the Greek New Testament.195 Foucault explains these differences
in connotations of the word in a series of lectures on the subject. Here, we will focus
on the use of the word by Michel Foucault who outlined the requirements necessary
for parrhesia to exist. Foucault popularized the notion of parrhesia and wrote of the
nature of “fearless speech,” one of the ways that the word parrhesia has been
translated. According to Foucault, the word first appeared in the writing of
Euripides in the Fifth Century BC and continued to be used through to the Fifth
Century AD. Parrhesia was the act of speaking freely and fearlessly and the
Parrhesiastes is the person who does it.
According to Foucault, one who merely speaks his mind—as free speech
might connote—does not meet the requirements to be considered a Parrhesiastes.
Parrhesia requires five criteria to be met: frankness, truth, danger, criticism, and
duty. According to Foucault, the Parrhesiastes “is someone who says everything he
has in mind: he does not hide anything, but opens his heart and mind completely to
other people through his discourse.”196 Foucault continues that the speaker must
not only speak freely, but authentically, saying that in parrhesia, when the speaker
speaks freely and authentically, the audience can sense that what is said is believed.
Thus, the Parrhesiastes is frank, but that frankness comes within a certain context,
and without that context the free speaker is merely that and not a Parrhesiastes. The
Parrhesiastes must also be perceived to know the truth and to speak it. Thus,
parrhesia is related to a moral truth telling.
195. NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon, “Parrhesia,” http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/Parrhesia.html. 196. Michel Foucault, Fearless Speech (Los Angeles: Semiotext, 2001), 12.
102
Then, Foucault adds danger to the ingredients necessary for parrhesia to
prevail: the moral truth teller must also be in some danger because of the truth
telling. Foucault gives the example of the philosopher and the tyrant:
When a philosopher addresses himself to a sovereign, to a tyrant, and tells him that his tyranny is disturbing and unpleasant because tyranny is incompatible with justice, then the philosopher speaks the truth, believes he is speaking the truth, and more than that, also takes a risk (since the tyrant may become angry, may punish him, may exile him, may kill him)… When you accept the Parrhesiastic game in which your own life is exposed, you are taking up a specific relationship to yourself: you risk death to tell the truth instead of reposing in the security of a life where the truth goes unspoken. Of course, the threat of death comes from the Other, and thereby requires a relationship to himself: he prefers himself as a truth–teller rather than as a living being who is false to himself.197
For Foucault, parrhesia also entails criticism directed to those “above” from
those “below.” He states that most of the time, the use of parrhesia requires that the
Parrhesiastes know his own genealogy, his own status.” In other words, the
Parrhesiastes must know his place and be in a place where the freedom of speech is
granted. Therefore, the “Parrhesiastes risks his privilege to speak freely” when he
discloses his truth.
Foucault’s last requirement to be a Parrhesiastes is that the truth telling,
done at risk, from someone in a position to know and speak the truth, done from
below to above, must be viewed as a duty. Ultimately, for Foucault, parrhesia is
about the self and the motivations of the self. Parrhesia is transformative for society
as well as for the self.
Hugo Chávez was not only a product of his historical context; he is also a
product of the decisions that he made and actions that he initiated. Foucault says, “a
197. Ibid., 16.
103
given problematization is not an effect or consequence of a historical context or
situation, but is an answer given by definite individuals.”198 Hugo Chávez, despite all
of the limitations discussed in the preceding sections of this chapter, challenged the
entrenched leadership of the Deep State199 belonging to the United States with its
allies in Venezuela.
While some may raise questions about calling Chávez a Parrhesiastes since
he was a very powerful man who was President of a country, I believe that the
preceding discussion makes it clear that being a president of a Third World country
who speaks the truth against Empire and imperialism is, in fact, knowingly putting
him or herself in danger because of what has happened to those others who have
done so. Hence, even though Chávez was a powerful political figure, there was real
risk in what he did and documented danger seen for others who have attempted to
lead powerful change against the imperial aims of the United States of America.
The Caracazo and the Politics of the Un
Jacques Rancière200 provides a definition of politics that I believe is
appropriate for any discussion of the phenomena observed surrounding the
leadership and the legacy of Hugo Chávez on race. According to Rancière, politics is
about inclusion and exclusion and for the Un, their proper place in politics is 198. Ibid., 172. 199. A brief overview of the idea of the Deep State and its meaningfulness in the case of the assassination of Congo liberation leader, Patrice Lumumba, is presented in Appendix C. For a fuller explanation of the Deep State and how it works, see Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993) and Peter Dale Scott, The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil, and the Attack on American Democracy (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015). Also see “Peter Dale Scott,” http://www.peterdalescott.net. 200. Jacques Ranciere, “What Does It Mean to Be Un?” Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 21, no. 4 (2007): 559–569, doi:10.1080/10304310701629961.
104
invisibility. The Un are the people who are not supposed to be involved in politics.
They are not expected to have a political opinion and they are not asked—just like
the invisible people before the Caracazo. According to Rancière, when it comes to
politics, the Un are the “un-‐qualified,” the “un-‐identified.” The role of the police, then
is to maintain this order about who is allowed inside and who must remain outside;
which bodies are in the right place and which bodies are out of place.
Rancière describes the Un: Jews in Nazi Germany, Aboriginals in Australia,
Blacks in the United States And for Rancière, not until they undergo a process of
“dis-‐identification” do they become a political Subject (in the Freirean sense). It is
this dis-‐identification that Fanon and Freire wrote about. And both Fanon and Freire
warned that without this de-‐identification—Freire called it conscientizaçao—the
most that would occur would be a reordering of domination. Instead, according to
Rancière, these unidentified and unqualified political objects are the ones who have
the “anarchic power.” When they cease being objects and become political subjects
they also cease being a part of the police order. According to Rancière, It is in these
anarchic moments when the Un cease to exist as Un that real politics takes place.
This occurs when the Un express their dissensus with the existing consensus. For
Rancière, this is the highest form of politics. He writes, “the very definition of politics
entails this anarchic moment.” 201
This is the zone within which Hugo Chávez operated. It is this politics of the
Un that describes and defines Chávez’s struggle. In order to understand and fully
appreciate the legacy and the leadership of Hugo Chávez, one must capture the
201. Ibid., 561.
105
Rancièrian notion of politics. Hugo Chávez, the once-‐skinny boy from the
Venezuelan plains, took his dissensus from the Washington consensus where very
few national leaders dared to go. It is the politics of the Un that made the rise of
Chávez even possible, with the Caracazo. And once in place, Hugo Chávez crafted a
politics of the Un that was global in its reach. The possibilities for change created by
this one man and the community of people inside Venezuela who lifted him up are
tectonic.
106
Research Problem, Purpose, Question, And Design
Research Problem and Question
Hugo Chávez was both loved and loathed. This dissertation is about race and
the legacy of one man who tried to change the racial power configurations inside
Venezuela and in the rest of the non-‐European world. The question this research
seeks to answer is “What kind of leadership does Hugo Chávez exemplify and what
is his legacy on race?”
We will explore Hugo Chávez’s leadership and his legacy on race. We will
explore what Hugo Chávez said about race, his African heritage, his African identity;
we will explore what others wrote and said about Hugo Chávez and race. And we
will explore Hugo Chávez in the spaces where his name is not mentioned.
Critical Methodology: Problematics and Pitfalls
Here, I introduce problematization because of the tool it offers the researcher
when questioning what is presumed to be “conventional wisdom.” Some of the most
dramatic developments have occurred when the underlying and accepted
assumptions of the literature itself were questioned by new ways of research.202
Mats Alvesson and Jorgen Sandberg203 posit that problematization, itself, could be
seen as a methodology and that challenging existing assumptions underlying
202. An example of this is the research of David Cunningham on the implementation of the Counter-‐Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) and the FBI’s selection of targets for repression. He found that the groups that were targeted and suffered the most repression were not the most violent ones, thereby exploding conventional wisdom up until that time in the literature. See David Cunningham, “The Patterning of Repression: FBI Counterintelligence and the New Left,” Social Forces 82, no. 1 (2003): 209–240, doi:10.1353/sof.2003.0079. 203. Mats Alvesson and Jorgen Sandberg, “Generating Research Questions through Problematization,” Academy of Management Review 36, no. 2 (2011): 247–271, doi:10.5465/AMR.2011.59330882.
107
existing literature is far more interesting to the audience than conventional
approaches, and is more likely to lead to “more influential theories.” They believe
this is true even in the Academy, and that mere gap-‐spotting, which often is all that
social research really does, does not add to the discipline. They write, “our idea is to
use problematization as a methodology for challenging the assumptions that
underlie not only others’ but also one’s own theoretical position.” They present “a
typology of assumptions open for problematization” 204 including in-‐house, root
metaphor, paradigmatic, ideological, and field assumptions.”205 According to
Alvesson and Sandberg,
In-‐house assumptions exist within a particular school of thought… The ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions that underlie a specific literature can be characterized as paradigmatic assumptions… Ideology assumptions include various political-‐, moral-‐, and gender-‐related assumptions held about the subject matter… Field assumptions are a broader set of assumptions about a specific subject matter that are shared by several different schools of thought within a paradigm, and sometimes even across paradigms and disciplines.206
Alvesson and Sandberg provide an important tool to not only problematize
the subject matter, but to also problematize the literature on that topic as I have
done above.
Boldly challenging positivist notions of detachment that might still lurk
within ivory towers interested in Critical Theory, Minerva Chávez puts herself in the
204. Ibid., 252. 205. Ibid., 255. 206. Ibid., 254–255.
108
center of her research and asserts five reasons to use Critical Race Theory (CRT).207
She insists on being an explicit part of her own research. Her reasons to use Critical
Race Theory are:
• It draws attention to the centrality of race and racism as one of many
means of oppression—along with gender, class, language;
• It challenges the “American” narrative and exposes liberal/progressive
use of “colorblindness” as a means of prolonging White privilege;
• It calls for social justice;
• It recognizes diverse forms of knowledge and is a form of resistance
knowledge;
• It uses multiple segments of The Academy for a “transdisciplinary
perspective.
Being aware of and eliminating researcher bias is a concern in research. Specific
strategies have been devised in qualitative research to diminish the impact of
researcher positionality. Additional strategies have been explored to diminish this
impact specifically in Critical Research. Vandenberg and Hall208 see Critical Theory
and critical ethnography in particular as fraught with the problem of researcher
positionality due to the importance of interpretation when assessing the results.
They write of Critical Theory as a tool that is used “to understand power
207. Minerva S. Chávez, “Autoethnography, a Chicana’s Methodological Research Tool: The Role of Storytelling for Those Who Have No Choice but to Do Critical Race Theory,” Equity & Excellence in Education 45, no. 2 (2012): 342–343, doi:10.1080/10665684.2012.669196. 208. Helen E.R. Vandenberg and Wendy A. Hall, “Critical Ethnography: Extending Attention to Bias and Reinforcement of Dominant Power Relations,” Nurse Researcher 18, no. 3 (2011): 25–30, doi:10.7748/nr2011.04.18.3.25.c8460.
109
relationships, social structures, oppression and social justice.”209 Critical
ethnography “is intended to help researchers understand relations of power by
merging a critical stance dealing with unjust situations with a complex and dynamic
qualitative strategy of enquiry.” The critical researcher who studies networks of
privilege might not sympathize with the participants. Besides, many mainstream
researchers empathize with their participants, or they are indifferent (which is also
an emotional stance) but they pretend to be objective.
I have chosen the topic of this dissertation because of sympathy with Hugo
Chávez. This is not unusual for biographers, however this is not always the case.210
Although my approach is not the same as a biographer, I am using some of the same
tools: Hugo Chávez’s own words, documents from his Administration and from the
United States government, and statements by others about Chávez. The problem for
a researcher, like me then, is to navigate the subject matter while maintaining an
acceptable scholarly distance at the same time. Nathaniel Comfort calls this being
sure to maintain empathy with our subject matter while not allowing that empathy
to reach the quality of sympathy.211 To resolve this dilemma, Vandenberg and Hall
recommend a three-‐pronged approach to deal with researcher bias: “reflexivity,
relationality, and reciprocity.”212
209. Ibid., 25. 210. For example, see Ann Oakley, “The Social Science of Biographical Life-‐Writing: Some Methodological and Ethical Issues,” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 13, no. 5 (2010): 425–439, doi:10.1080/13645571003593583. 211. Nathaniel Comfort, “When Your Sources Talk Back: Toward a Multimodal Approach to Scientific Biography,” Journal of History of Biology 44, no. 4 (2011): 667, doi:10.1007/s10739-‐011-‐9273-‐9. 212. Vandenberg and Hall, “Critical Ethnography,” 29.
110
They define reflexivity as “open reflection about researchers’ beliefs and
values during the research process.”213 This reflexivity is what occurs when one is
mindful throughout the research process of how the researcher affects the research.
This mindfulness should hopefully prevent the researcher from tipping the scales of
balance too far in one direction. Vandenberg and Hall write that this reflexivity
makes the researcher conscious of decisions made during research design and data
collection.
The researcher and the participants should be seen as coequals in the
process of arriving at the conclusions of the research. Because critical research
entails a focus on power in relationships, it is important that external power
differentials not become internal to the research. This is where Vandenberg and
Hall’s idea of relationality becomes important, and it also decreases a type of
researcher bias that accords more power to the researcher than the participant. In
fact, the research would not be successful without the participant, and therefore,
that co-‐equitable status should be reflected during the research process and in the
conclusions. According to Vandenberg and Hall, relationality is achieved when the
participants share power and decision-‐making with the researcher.
Understanding the special or unique needs of the participants creates a kind
of reciprocity that Vandenberg and Hall believe is also important in reducing
researcher bias. Sometimes these needs are unspoken, like, for example, the need
for anonymity. When the researcher satisfies these special needs of the participants,
according to Vandenberg and Hall, the result is an atmosphere of heightened trust.
213. Ibid., 29.
111
Vandenberg and Hall write, “Reciprocity is the creation of trust and support
between researcher and participants.”214 Vandenberg and Hall believe that
reciprocity increases participant involvement and that all three of these strategies,
taken together, increase participant involvement and reduce researcher bias. They
believe that their recommendations are particularly important in the use of
Carpsecken’s Critical Methodology, which I will discuss in the next section. This
research will utilize both Vandenberg and Hall’s recommendations and the
Carspecken Methodology to reduce the impact of researcher positionality on the
researcher project, itself.
The Carspecken Critical Qualitative Methodology is a particularly useful way
to reduce bias because it is flexible and comprehensive in that it accommodates
different types of data and data collection. Carspecken uses the term “critical
qualitative research” (CQR) to describe the kind of research that he prefers to do as
a “form of social activism” and calls those who follow the CQR approach as
“criticalists.” Carspecken’s methodological approach “incorporates the basic tenets
of critical theory”215 in a five-‐stage framework. The five stages proceed like this:
• Stage One: Building a primary etic216 record that consists of
non-‐participant data collection and reflection, analyzed for cultural
reconstruction that explains, “What’s Going On?”;
214. Ibid., 30. 215. Mary-‐Ann Hardcastle, Kim Usher, and Colin Holmes, “Carspecken’s Five-‐Stage Critical Qualitative Research Method: An Application to Nursing Research,” Qualitative Health Research 16, no. 1 (2006): 153, doi:10.1177/1049732305283998. 216. Etic data are those items, such as documents, considered by the researcher as stand-‐alone units for analysis. They come from outside the system that is being studied.
112
• Stage Two: Researcher interpretation of the etic perspective in
“preliminary reconstructive analysis that also engages in cultural
reconstruction in which the researcher asks him or herself “Why is this
going on?”;
• Stage Three: Emic217 dialogic data generation with participants as
collaborators with an objective of emic cultural reconstruction while the
researcher begins to get answers from insiders on “Why things are the
way that they are”;
• Stage Four: Describe systems relations in an etic systems analysis where
similar knowledge exists;
• Stage Five: Explain relational systems by linking findings to broader
existing theories in an etic systems analysis.218
Examination of the problematized scholarly literature on Hugo Chávez and
information about U.S. covert actions and perspectives constitute Stage One data.
According to Carspecken’s methodology, these data have been collected while being
mindful of the choices of data that are selected for analysis. This roughly
corresponds to Vandenberg and Hall’s reflexivity. Participant interviews constitute
Stage Three data, roughly corresponding to Vandenberg and Hall’s relationality and
reciprocity. However, Carspecken adds another expectation of these data: that they
will begin to answer the question of why things are the way that they are. In this
research, then, the global system of neoliberalism and its interaction with race
217. Emic data are units of evidence, such as participant interviews, that are considered in research to be generated from within the system of interest. 218. Hardcastle et al., “Carspecken’s,” 153.
113
provides the Stage Four systems analysis. The combination of the use of Vandenberg
and Hall’s approach and Carspecken’s methodology should increase researcher
mindfulness, increase participant participation, increase internal validity, and
therefore reduce bias as much as is practicable.
The goal of this research is to describe the legacy of Hugo Chávez on race as
accurately as possible after input from participants, document analysis, and a
reading of the literature. Also, where necessary, Spanish language translators—
human and electronic, including Google Translate—have been used to translate
articles and Spanish language material.
Oral History Tools
According to Mary Larson, Oral History is a genre of qualitative research
known as a “populist methodology”219 whose researchers have developed deep
concerns about privilege and power in society and in recorded history. Oral History
relies heavily on interviews and its domain is sound. It is concerned not only with
the collection of data, but also with the translation of that data. Therefore, Oral
History is not just what was said, but how it was said, the setting within which it was
said, and the expression with which it was said. Emerging in the 1950s and 1960s as
a methodology, the use of Oral History has seen explosive growth, especially in
human rights work in Latin America.220 While this creates additional burdens and
ethical responsibilities, which will be discussed in the next sub-‐section, the
219. Mary Larson, “Steering Clear of the Rocks: A Look at the Current State of Oral History Ethics in the Digital Age,” Oral History Review 40, no. 1 (2013): 42, doi:10.1093/ohr/oht028. 220. Ronald J. Grele, “Review Essay: Oral History Theory by Lynn Abrams,” Oral History Review 38, no. 2 (2011): 357, doi:10.1093/ohr/ohr059.
114
combination of the internet and the Creative Commons, a liberal copyright system,
have made Oral History and its audio and video documentaries available to a much
wider audience.
Borrowing some of the tools of the Oral History methodology is appropriate
for this research that seeks to understand Hugo Chávez, race, and his struggle
against the exclusion, invisibility, and marginalization of African and Indigenous
descendants ensnared in the grip of neoliberal policies, run from Washington, D.C.
Interviews provide more depth than just the examination of documents, alone.221
Oral Historians are clear that the process of the interview is a two-‐way
experience that should be considered “as an exchange between two Subjects.”222
Both the interviewer and the narrator are impacted by each other. There is a tension
between the individualized aspects of the interview process in Oral History and the
need for generalizing in research. Therefore, Oral History has been exempted from
some Institutional Review Board (IRB) requirements,223 although this is not the case
for Antioch University. However, the ethical needs and considerations of Oral
History go beyond the IRB process, for example, in constructing a reality within a
highly politicized setting. At least one researcher, Erin Jessee, found herself omitting
huge swaths of information provided by the narrators due to self-‐censorship in
order to protect the narrators and her not being able to sift propaganda out of the
221. Comfort, “When Your Sources.” 222. Stephen Sloan, “On the Other Foot: Oral History Students as Narrators,” Oral History Review 39, no. 2 (2012): 306, doi:10.1093/ohr/ohs086. 223. Karen M. Staller, “Epistemological Boot Camp: The Politics of Science and What Every Qualitative Researcher Needs to Know to Survive in the Academy,” Qualitative Social Work 12, no. 4 (2012): 400, doi:10.1177/1473325012450483.
115
stories of the participants.224 Jessee concludes that Oral History does not provide
enough guidance for these types of situations.
My research will use the tools of oral history, but is not an Oral History
project. I will interview participants knowledgeable on the leadership and legacy of
Hugo Chávez on the issue of race.
Ethics: Going Beyond the Institutional Review Board
An important recognition in Oral History is that it is an exchange and not
done in isolation; both parties impact each other. The interviews are often recorded
and Oral Historians like to keep, rather than destroy, these data. Because of this,
attention must be paid to the ethics of the interaction. However, because of the
nature of most Oral History research, it has clashed with many Institutional Review
Boards that govern institutional research ethics. Oral Historians prefer named
participants rather than anonymous ones; because of the fluidity of the interview,
there are rarely set questions; most times Oral History is not meant to be
generalizable; and Oral Historians claim conscience and ethics over the IRB.225
However, Oral History requires honesty in the field and honesty in the editing room.
Teresa Iacobelli gives an example of how her research exposed that the Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation intentionally manipulated the oral histories that it had
224. Erin Jessee, “The Limits of Oral History: Ethics and Methodology amid Highly Politicized Research Settings,” Oral History Review 38, no. 2 (2011): 287–307, doi:10.1093/ohr/ohr098. 225. See Mary Larson, “Steering Clear,” 36–49.
116
recorded and had broadcast an inauthentic story on two occasions lionizing
Canadian military prowess in World War I and World War II.226
Because of the political turmoil taking place in Venezuela currently, and
because of the contested views on Hugo Chávez worldwide, participants in this
research, in particular Venezuelans who agree to participate in this research, should
be considered a vulnerable population. Their words taken down today for a
research project should not come back to haunt them tomorrow. Therefore, all
participants in this research have been made anonymous—unless they specifically
chose to be identified after I discussed with them the possible risks of doing so. This
ethical decision to protect especially the Venezuelan participants in this research is
consistent with the notion of “ethics in practice,” that is advanced by Guillemin and
Gillam.227
Research is supposed to be systematic, rigorous, and, in the case of
qualitative research, transferable. That is, according to James McMillan and Jon
Wergin, research “relies on careful, formal procedures” that include “procedures
designed to reduce and control bias” and that “relies on data that are tangible.”228
For the purposes of my research, Chávez is viewed through the prism of
transformational Parrhesiastes, and, further, of a transformational Parrhesiastes of
African descent or of color. But that is not enough. There is another basis on which 226. Teresa Iacobelli, “ ‘A Participant’s History?’: The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the Manipulation of Oral History,” Oral History Review 38, no. 2 (2011): 331–348, doi:10.1093/ohr/ohr099. 227. Marilys Guillemin and Lynn Gillam, “Ethics, Reflexivity, and ‘Ethically Important Moments’ in Research,” Qualitative Inquiry 10, no. 2 (2004): 261–280, doi:10.1177/1077800403262360. 228. James McMillan and John Wergin, Understanding and Evaluating Educational Research (Boston: Pearson, 2010), 1.
117
this research rests: Chávez’s resistance to neoliberalism and its disproportionately
marginalizing effect on people of color, especially people of African descent. By way
of his discourse, Chávez grounds himself in this history and with those who have
similarly resisted oppression, colonialism, and racism. Hence, both the oppression
and the resistance are necessary parts of the story of Hugo Chávez. The legacy of
Hugo Chávez, then, it is hoped, will explain how one transformational Parrhesiastes
of color resisted racial oppression and economic domination.
I am interested in how Hugo Chávez’s legacy informs us of transformational
leadership and Parrhesiastes, overall. I am looking for deep understanding of
transformational leadership and Parrhesiastes in the legacy of Hugo Chávez seen
from the perspective of racial liberation.
The goals of this research are modest: its purpose is to shed some light on a
little known aspect of the race-‐conscious leadership of Hugo Chávez. That is,
through the citationality that the described experience evokes in the reader. It is my
hope that this Dissertation will help to rebalance the bias against Chávez while
shedding more light on his struggles against European domination and
neoliberalism. Some will ask us to gaze into the future and assess the strength of the
social movement led by Chávez; research into social movement resiliency could be
used to peer into the future, without Chávez’s leadership, of the Bolivarian process
in Venezuela.229 In other words, will the social movements that spawned the
leadership of Chávez now be resilient enough to thrive without his leadership?
229. For example, Jenna Jordan, “When Heads Roll: Assessing the Effectiveness of Leadership Decapitation,” Security Studies 18, no. 4 (2009): 719–755, doi:10.1080/09636410903369068.
118
Others, who had begun to count on his vision and his voice, no doubt, are asking
themselves, “What next?” But, in this research, those questions will have to wait for
another time.
For now, the matter at hand is how selected participants and available
documents perceive the legacy on race of Hugo Chávez, a South American leader
who proudly proclaimed his African and Indigenous heritage. I will situate his
struggles by analyzing the challenges he faced from the United States as he fought
both European domination and neoliberalism. I will use his own words to better
know him; I will seek interviews from participants who knew or knew of him.
Criteria for the type of people who will be interviewed in this research are discussed
in the upcoming section.
Research Design
This dissertation has been carried out as a case study as well as utilizing
some tools of the oral history methodology—interviews and documentary audio
and video. The research uses a variety of types of data in order to understand Hugo
Chávez’s legacy on race. I utilize original data that are informative about the racial
context of Hugo Chávez’s leadership. This is accomplished, first, by utilizing
documents that are a critical component to picture hegemonic views and
perceptions of Chávez. These documents provide an impression of what is
happening in Chávez’s world in relation to race, from the perspective of those highly
critical of Chávez focused on the communications of government officials in a
number of countries. U.S. Government documents were analyzed to gain this
understanding. Interpretation and analysis of these documents, should not only
119
inform us on what was happening, but also who the central characters are in this
unfolding drama. These sources may also help to explain the prevalence of literature
critical of Chávez. The careful construction of this dataset was also done, mindful of
my own positionality and along the lines suggested for Critical Qualitative Research
by Carspecken. This means that the government documents, the literature reviewed,
the selection and analysis of participant input, all have been carried out with a goal
of reducing researcher positionality, for the purpose of making the case for the
legacy on race of Hugo Chávez. His own words, retrieved from audio and video
documents, policies, actions, and writings are critical elements in the data.
Particular attention was paid to Hugo Chávez’s “A Letter to Africa” as reflective of
his ideas on race and Africa and the racial interpretation of his policies. Insights
from analysis of this data should also tell us why this drama has been taking place.
What is the core of the struggle that has been involved in the Hugo Chávez story?
Interviews were conducted and analyzed to search for explanations from an
insider’s point of view, what and who the key players were in Hugo Chávez’s
struggle against European domination and neoliberalism and why. Here, it is
important to note that the participants in this research came from those who have
special insight into the Chávez journey and were asked the meaning they attached to
Hugo Chávez as a Venezuelan President of color who identifies with Africa. This
special insight came from journalists charged with covering Chávez and from
academics familiar with how the issue of race interacts in Latin America and the
Caribbean or inside U.S. foreign policy. This special insight also came from
Venezuelans who understand racism when they see it whether they identify as
120
Afro-‐Venezuelans or not. These voices are from people who are underrepresented in
The Academy: this includes some academics who have not been heard, as well as
community voices that have not been listened to before in this type of academic
research. These are the voices who do not hesitate to explore the topic of Hugo
Chávez and race.
Participants were selected based on the following criteria:
• They know Hugo Chávez and know of the racial significance of his
leadership and work; or
• They know of Hugo Chávez and know of his leadership and work on race;
or
• They are active in social movement organizations and understand the
significance and reach of the leadership of Hugo Chávez on race; or
• They are scholars involved in the study of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, or
race.
All participants did not necessarily know Chávez directly, but instead must
have known of Chávez’s leadership on race directly. There is no geographic
limitation on who was selected to be a participant.
Participants were identified in a snowball fashion, based on referrals from
other similarly situated Participants. The interviews began with a brief description
of the purpose of the research. After explaining the ethical information that
participants should know, I audio-‐recorded the interviews. I asked participants,
“What do you consider to be Hugo Chávez’s legacy on race?” I concluded the
interview by asking the participant if there is anything that I failed to ask that they
121
would like to contribute to this research. I then thanked the participant and ended
the interview.
I am interested in the lived experiences of the participants that make them
amply suitable to participate in this research and thus their reflections on this topic.
By that I mean what it is about Hugo Chávez that drew their attention to him and
what is it about them that drew their attention to Hugo Chávez. I am interested in
the lived racial experiences of Hugo Chávez that make him a suitable topic of
exploration.
Always mindful of my positionality, and in order to ensure accuracy, the
participant interviews were member-‐checked. That is, the used quotes and
paraphrases were sent to the participants and confirmed for accuracy. They were
changed where indicated by the participant. The participants also have access to the
audio of our interview if needed or requested.
Researcher Positionality
I write this Dissertation as someone who simultaneously wears many aspects
of my identity: I am known as someone who believes and participates in politics and
elective office; I am also known around the world as a peace and human rights
activist. Because of these two aspects of my identity, I know and have access to
people from different walks of life; I believe I gained this reputation because I am
also an advocate for causes that are much greater than me. I have risked my life to
witness destruction after bombing and to witness horrific war crimes being
committed during bombing. Therefore, I have witnessed the ultimate in oppression.
122
I am Black. I have extensively studied the U.S. program to quash legitimate
dissent by using “illegal and un-‐American” means, as described, for example, by
Senator Frank Church, who investigated the U.S. Government crimes against the
people of the United States in the Counterintelligence Program (COINTELPRO).
All of this gives me a special kind of knowledge. I have participated in
government actions that produced cable traffic. No doubt, my actions both inside
and outside of Congress have been the subject of cable traffic. I know how to read
U.S. Government cables, noting what they do and do not contain. In my career so far
I have inconveniently exposed the Deep Politics that sit alongside Deep Events.
As a Black “Child of the South” and direct beneficiary of the U.S. Civil Rights
Movement, I know how important leadership is; I have been in the presence of
transformational leaders and Parrhesiastes. I know the danger that walks with
them. I am part of an oppressed group whose faces are at “the bottom of the well” all
around the world. If there were anyone who would pay attention—out of the sheer
need for survival—to leaders, governments, repression, and resistance, it would be
me.
So, when I experienced the emotions of the crowd as they circulated in
Caracas two days after the death of Hugo Chávez, I decided that I needed to know
more about this leader. I decided that I would use the tools of my unique
experiences to understand the legacy of Hugo Chávez and the importance of his
leadership. I do believe that his case can illuminate the nature and needs of
resistance leadership for people of color.
123
I can’t help but be a part of this research. I am a known commodity. I feel that
I have much to learn about my own leadership for the study of the Chávez legacy. My
intention is to bracket myself for the research contained in this dissertation by
stating plainly what my perspectives are. I have already done this in the first and
second chapters and will include my concluding perspectives in later chapters.
124
Information Sources—Participants and Documents
To conduct this study I relied on three main categories of data and
information:
• Unstructured interviews undertaken from December 2013 to August
along with one group interview.
• Literature on Chávez including U.S. opposition to him and his regime;
• Other documentary materials (books, articles, websites etc.) that speak to
the wider political, social and economic context within which Hugo
Chávez rose and led his country.
This chapter comprises descriptions and elaborations on these sources,
following the above order.
Participants and Interviews
From December 2013 to August 2014, nineteen open-‐ended, unstructured
interviews were conducted, along with one group interview of six, for a total of
twenty-‐five participants. A description of all of the interviewees is available in
Appendix B. Approximately one half of the participants were from the United States
and nearly one half were from countries closely affected by Hugo Chávez, like
Jamaica, Haiti, Cuba, or Ghana, as well as Bolivarian Venezuela under Chávez’s
leadership,
Focus Group
The focus group of six participants was among the last interviews conducted.
It was comprised of Akinyele Umoja, Ph.D., Chair of the Georgia State University
African American Studies Department who is also active with the Malcolm X
125
Grassroots Movement; Cynthia Hewitt, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Sociology at
Morehouse College who is also active with the All African People’s Revolutionary
Party, begun by Kwame Nkrumah and led in the United States by Stokely Carmichael
also known as Kwame Turé. Professor Hewitt was the only woman involved in the
focus group. In addition to the two scholar activists who are originally from the
United States, other activists representing Caribbean, Latin American, and African
origins were included in the discussion. These were people who happen to be in the
United States, but are of African, Jamaican, or Haitian descent. The six group
participants were equally divided: three born in the United States and three born
elsewhere. The four distinguishing characteristics of all of these Participants were:
• Knowledge about the work of Hugo Chávez on race;
• Extensive knowledge of the politics of the Caribbean, Africa, and Latin
America;
• Active participation in a Pan-‐Africanist or humanitarian organizations;
and
• U.S. residency in the Metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia area.
Individual Interview Participants
In addition to the focus group participants, individual interviews were
conducted with nineteen participants. These participants included individuals who
were scholars, journalists, or activists with extensive knowledge of Hugo Chávez,
Venezuela, or race. For example, Professor Molefi Asante is the Chair of the
Department of Africology at Temple University; Professor Lewis Gordon is the
renowned expert on Frantz Fanon and issues pertaining to identity, especially
126
African or Black identity; Donald Smith, Baruch College Professor Emeritus, was so
moved by Freire’s work that he retraced Freire’s steps in Brazil and required his
education students to read Freire’s seminal work, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. George
Ciccariello-‐Maher is Assistant Professor of History and Politics at Drexel University,
whose first book We Created Chávez, (reviewed in the second chapter) is about
Venezuelan social movements. Activists like Larry Pinkney, founding member of the
Black Panther Party, who has something to say about Black Political Leadership, and
James Early, Director of Cultural Heritage Policy for the Smithsonian Center for
Folklife and Cultural Heritage, who had actually met Hugo Chávez and queried him
on the issue of race, were also included as participants. Three journalists were
interviewed; two of them specialized in U.S. “Deep State” politics, that is, the
activities of the U.S. Government that it would not want publicly known. One of
those two journalists is based in Latin America, the other, in the United States. Both
are United States citizens.
Four of the individuals interviewed were Venezuelan women. One woman
was of a Haitian descendant and was also a U.S. citizen who happened to be in
Venezuela conducting research at the time of her interview. Another woman
interviewed was an Afro-‐Cuban who just happened to be giving a lecture in the
United States and I was allowed to participate in her lecture and question her after it
by electronic means. There were a total of seven women, including the panel
participant, Cynthia Hewitt. Five of them have a Ph.D. Of the nineteen men who
participated in this research, six had obtained a Ph.D. Therefore, of the total number
of twenty-‐five participants; twelve had obtained a Ph.D., with five of the Ph.D.’s
127
being held by women. All of the participants met the requirement set forward in the
third chapter of having knowledge of Hugo Chávez’s leadership, legacy on race, or of
specialized work on race.230
Documents on U.S. Actions against the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela
One of the principal themes in this study of Hugo Chávez’s
race-‐consciousness and leadership is how he courageously chose to confront the
Washington Consensus, the hegemony of the United States in its global reach and
control of other nations’ economies, resources and governments. Thus it is
important here to look behind the veil of U.S. push-‐back against Chávez’s Bolivarian
Revolution. Much of this has been covert and so the advent of WikiLeaks seemed a
solid opportunity for furthering understanding of the U.S. “war against
Venezuela”231 Unfortunately, at least for now, there is reluctance on the part of
many academic institutions to use this trove of information because, by its very
nature, it is unauthorized information from unwilling sources.232 There is also the
chill of possible legal action by the U.S. Government. Therefore, with regret, this
research will not include information drawn from those WikiLeaks documents.233
Fortunately, many journalists, some in the United States and many more
abroad, have drawn on the WikiLeaks cables as part of their broader research into
230. Audio of participant interviews is available in supplemental files as listed in front matter; additional information about each is in Appendix B. 231. A phrase used by many critics including Eva Golinger, Bush versus Chávez: Washington’s War on Venezuela, (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2008). 232. For a thoughtful critique of the idea that using WikiLeaks in academic research is unethical, see Gabriel J. Michael, "Who's Afraid of WikiLeaks? Missed Opportunities in Political Science Research,” Review of Policy Research 32, no. 2 (2015): 175–199, doi:10.1111/ropr.12120. 233. See my preface for more perspective on the non-‐use of such documents.
128
U.S. subterfuge against and other world leaders whose activities are perceived as
antithetical to multinational and U.S. military interests. The perspectives of some
such authors are reviewed here, along with other secondary sources, as a significant
basis for understanding the nature and depth of the U.S. war against Chávez.
Overall, then, from such secondary literature sources, it is clear that the
United States government engaged in provocative behavior and then criticized
Chávez’s response as hate-‐engendering rhetoric based on the belief that “Chavismo
poses a serious threat to democracy not just in Venezuela but the region, and it
directly competes against U.S. influence in Latin America.”234
Other Documents on Chávez and the Opposition He Faced
The context of Hugo Chávez’s leadership on race must be set by a
consideration of the region, significant United States behavior, and events in
Venezuela. Fortunately, there is a wide range of critical and insightful revelations of
this context in the literature. An important part of the context is documentation of
the now-‐well-‐established role the U.S, has played globally in the overthrow of
popular, socially progressive regimes, including assassinations, both attempted and
successful, on leaders seen to be unfriendly to capitalism. We have learned that the
murder of Patrice Lumumba affected Frantz Fanon and Hugo Chávez calls out
Lumumba’s name in his “A Letter to Africa.” Recent acknowledgement from the
United States Department of State of the U.S. authorization of and funding for
Lumumba’s murder is extremely important confirmatory information of long-‐held 234. This kind of fear-‐mongering language was reported in “U.S. and Venezuela Diplomats Fight Over Everything, Including Fast Food,” Before It’s News, July 14, 2011, http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2011/07/u-‐s-‐and-‐venezuela-‐diplomats-‐fight-‐over-‐everything-‐including-‐fast-‐food-‐818744.html.
129
suspicions. Declassified Operation Condor235 documents reveal that Phase Three of
that Operation included the assembly of kill teams ready to travel anywhere in
order to assassinate the target. Hugo Chávez was aware of Operation Condor and
other covert U.S. actions against progressive regimes. Appendix D includes further
discussion of this contextual information and on other covert interventions such as
the CIA’s “Family Jewels.”236 This mind-‐set of relentless domination is what Hugo
faced—and confronted.
235. “Operation Condor” was an ostensibly anti-‐Communist intelligence and repression program that coordinated operations among the United States and Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay, later joined by Ecuador and Peru. Activities included assassinations. 236. “Family Jewels” is the name given to a series of CIA operations that included illegal activities in Latin America as well as inside the U.S. “Family Jewel” documents were declassified in 2007.
130
Hugo Chávez’s Leadership: Transformational, Parrhesia, Political, and African-‐Centered Leadership
Hugo Chávez As a Transformational Leader
According to James McGregor Burns, a “transformational leader” is a person
who uses his or her intellectual leadership at a time of political opportunity to
mobilize others with impact in collective purpose for end values like liberty, dignity,
or justice. Burns writes that the transforming leader “engages the full person of the
follower” and stimulates followers to become leaders as leaders become moral
agents.237 I will examine each of these components of Chávez’s actions from what is
written about him and from those who knew him. But, before I do that, I will quote
one of my participants, Al Giordano, on Chávez’s impact on his followers and the
transformation of Venezuelan society that resulted.
Al Giordano is founder of the Authentic School of Journalism where Evo
Morales, President of Bolivia, and his current Vice President, once attended. He
founded the website, Narconews.com. Giordano explains that Chávez directly
challenged the Venezuelan oligarchs. In our interview, he said, “In South America,
there is this oligarchy—a set of elite families, and then an upper middle class below
them—that enjoy unique protections from the state that the rest of the population
doesn't have. These people were freaked out by Chávez, because all of a sudden, the
gardener, the maid, the nanny, all of these domestic employees these people had in
their homes began to feel their own power.”
237. James MacGregor Burns, Leadership (New York: Harper-‐Collins, 1978), 4.
131
Chávez’s Intellectual Leadership As a Part of His Transformational Leadership
Hugo Chávez was an avid reader and political mind. Marcano and Tyszka
write about his political astuteness, and those who knew him and were interviewed
in this study also speak of that aspect of his leadership. For example, James Early
had the opportunity to meet Chávez and appear on his television show, Alo
Presidente, several times. Early is currently the Director of Cultural Studies and
Communications at the Center for Folklife Programs and Cultural Studies at the
Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. “I think he [Chávez] was a genius kind of
mind.” Early goes on to state that Chávez had a thirst for learning and for reading
“and an extraordinary ability to remember and to synthesize what he read.” Early
notes that Chávez’s “mind capacity” was reflected as he moved into more formal
leadership roles. Early observes, “He could give these very long dissertations and
speeches without any notes. Without any paper around and quote dates and names.”
Early notes that Chávez’s grasp and love of history combined with his understanding
of history informed his own personal development and also informed his leadership.
So, according to Early, Chávez’s “first leadership was self-‐actualization, I would say.”
Venezuelan Woman Participant #2, a professor of sociology with an
emphasis in globalization and development, calls Chávez an “organic intellectual.”
She repeatedly noted how he was so voracious a reader, saying how he understood
that in order to transform Venezuela, a new form of governance, a new form of
production, and a new man, as Ché Guevara called for, was needed. She felt Chávez
also understood that societal changes result from internal psychological processes.
132
Giordano agrees on Chávez’s intellectual prowess. In an interview for this
research, Giordano told me that Chávez could hold minute budget details in his
head, surprising hostile U.S. press many times. Giordano related his experience with
Chávez:
In his press conferences, Chávez would get asked a question from the international reporters like from the Wall Street Journal trying to stump him with a very nuanced question on a sub-‐budget within some sub-‐department of the oil company. Chávez would spend the first 20 minutes talking about whatever he wanted to talk about. And then he would come back and say, ‘now about your question. The budget is X number of bolivars a year and we’ve increased that by 16% over last year.’ And he had all of that information in his head. While the international media tried to treat him as some kind of buffoon, he was really one of the smartest and most intellectual political leaders that I’ve been in the room with and I’ve been in the room with many.
Chávez’s Mobilization for Transformational End Values As a Part of His Leadership
According to Chávez, Venezuela was struggling and fighting the good fight for
inclusion of everyone, not just a privileged few. In 2003, when addressing the group
of poor countries known as the G-‐77 at the United Nations, Chávez said:
Venezuela’s sin in recent years has been to wage a thorough battle against inequality; our sin in Venezuela is to dare, as we have done and continue to do, to make our words match our deeds in our daily actions, Venezuela’s sin has been to date, for the first time in a hundred years, to go up against the ostentatious privileges of a stupid and insensitive oligarchy that for a hundred years led a people sitting on gold and oil to a degree of poverty that affects more than eighty percent of our population. That is our sin. Our sin, in the eyes of that Venezuelan oligarchy, is that we have been able to keep our promise to the people that elected us to run the country in the interests of the majority.238
Chávez spoke about justice and peace; equality and equity. His Bolivarian
Project was to provide dignity to a people who had been betrayed by their political 238. Hugo Chávez, The Fascist Coup Against Venezuela: “The Life of the Homeland is at Stake Here”: Speeches and Addresses December 2002–January 2003,” 2nd ed. (Havana, Ediciones Plaza, 2003), 152–153.
133
leadership. Speaking on January 17, 2003, before the Venezuelan National Assembly,
a body that existed as a result of Chávez’s mobilization of the people for a new
Constitution—the Bolivarian Constitution—that gave them important recognition
and rights, Chávez said: “We are not going to give an inch when it comes to the
principles of justice, equality and equity that guide the Bolivarian project, because to
do so would be to once again betray the most betrayed people in the history of our
America.”239 Additionally, in a speech that hauntingly reminds me of a President
John F. Kennedy speech, Chávez asked, “Do Venezuelans want peace?” Answering
his own question, he added: “Yes, we do want peace, but we don’t want the peace of
the graves; we don’t want the peace of slaves; . . . the only peace possible is through
justice.”240
Speaking at a school, Chávez compared the educational policies of the
Bolivarian Government to those of previous governments. He said: “Their project is
marginalizing; their project means that only the children of the privileged, those
who can pay for education, go to school. The children of the poor families that make
up eighty percent of the population couldn’t go to the privatized schools. That’s why,
at all costs, with all our courage, we must defend our wonderful Revolution and this
Constitution, this Bolivarian Constitution.”241
On January 10, 2003, Chávez spoke about the significance of the Bolivarian
Revolution in Venezuela as he handed out land titles to peasants in the countryside.
He said that the Bolivarian Revolution was built on truth and on reality. He said that
239. Ibid., 165. 240. Ibid., 124. 241. Ibid., 55.
134
the Land and Agrarian Development Act was one of the reasons that the Opposition
had lashed out against him in the way that it had. He said that the oligarchs wanted
to stop the justice of the Bolivarian Revolution and that these titles he was about to
distribute represented justice. He said that the Bolivarian government had handed
over thousands of hectares of land, provided millions of bolivars in credits, and
hundreds of government-‐subsidized apartments through the National Housing
Institute. He concluded his remarks by repeating that his only sin had been to be
faithful to the confidence that the people had placed in him. He said that he would
not abandon them and that he would continue the struggle for justice and for
equality. He said that he believed that if the goal was to eliminate poverty, then
power must be put into the hands of the poor. He said that the Bolivarian Revolution
gave power to the people and power to the poor. His parting remarks included this
message: “This is a government of the people, this is a government for the people.
This is not a government of the oligarchy, nor is it a government for the oligarchy,
because the first commitment of a democratic government is to the people that
elected it, and, above all, the neediest among those people: the poor, the poorest, the
middle classes.”242
While definitely uncomfortable with Chávez’s rise in the late 1990s, the
United States, through a delegation chaired by its former Ambassador to Venezuela,
Otto Reich, had to concede that the new President’s “16-‐point margin of victory—
coupled with the election’s impressive 64 percent voter turnout—suggest a strong
242. Ibid., 104.
135
mandate for change.”243 For conservative “western” commentators, Chávez’s
ascendancy was but an “untypical throwback” (see below). Later, as we will soon
see, the U.S. attitude towards Chávez turned from unenthusiastic indifference to
covert and overt hostile activity.
Perhaps the most powerful demonstration of the importance of Chávez and
his legacy can be seen in the enactment of a new Constitution in 1999 and the
massive public mobilization after his kidnapping during the attempted coup against
his Presidency in 2002.
In order to write the new constitution, Chávez first had to win the
Presidential election; then he had to win the referendum on a new constitution and
the Constitutional Assembly, called the Constituyente. The Constituyente would then
draft the new constitution to be implemented in the last phase of the process. This
was a massive process that could not be done without full mobilization of all sectors
of the Venezuelan society—a process that the United States seemed immediately
suspicious of. As the framing and eventual referendum on Chávez’s constitutional
reform moved along, there was an abrupt and significant increase in what would
become a major U.S. thrust for what was called “democracy promotion” in
Venezuela. “NED (National Endowment for Democracy) spending in Venezuela
during the period illustrates that the organization responded to Chávismo almost
243. International Republican Institute, Venezuela’s 1998 Presidential, Legislative, and Gubernmatorial Elections: Election Observation Report (Washington, D.C.: IRI, February 12, 1999): 1. Notwithstanding, Otto Reich would continue on, especially during George W. Bush’s presidency, to be a key part of strategizing against Chávez. On this, see Rodrigo Guevara, “Otto Reich: Planificator del Golpe Mediatico contra Chávez,” IAR Noticias.com, June 21, 2004, http://iarnoticias.com/secciones/latinoamerica/0041_otto_reich_19jun04.html.
136
from the start. In 1999 Venezuela ranked the highest of 11 countries in the region
for NED-‐funded programs. The IRI (the International Republican Institute) received
the most funding out of all NED grantees in Venezuela during the period, and it
responded to Chávez’s push for a new constitution by using a US$194,521 grant to
develop a network for offering input into the drafting process.”244 This funding was
entirely for parties and players who were openly opposed to Chávez and what he
was doing.
Mobilizing for Transformation: The Bolivarian Constitution and Chávez’s Transformational Leadership
Before 1998 Venezuelan elections had long been plagued by poor turnouts.
Noam Lupu, who questioned the conventional wisdom about who Chávez voters
were, found that he drew support from the poor as well as the middle class.245
Further, he determined that Chávez did not disproportionately decrease voter
absence from the poorest segment of the voting population. He determined that
Chávez’s support consistently grew with the middle class representing the greatest
increase of support. Lupu concludes that Chávez’s voter base was not
disproportionately poor and that it was only the extremely wealthy who
overwhelmingly opposed Chávez.
At the outset of Chávez’s candidacy, the United States did not appear overly
concerned, perhaps thinking that Chávez would not win the election due to his
244. Christopher I. Clement, “Confronting Hugo Chávez: United States ‘Democracy Promotion’ in Latin America,” Latin American Perspectives 32, no. 3, (2005), 6, doi:10.1177/0094592X05275529. 245. Noam Lupu, “Who Votes for Chavismo? Class Voting in Hugo Chávez’s Venezuela,” Latin American Research Review 45, no. 1 (2010): 7–32, doi:10.1353/lar.0.0083.
137
failure to attract large crowds. Seven months later, in September, Chávez had
become the front-‐runner. Oxford University political scientist Laurence Whitehead,
writing in a book that was funded by the National Endowment for Democracy,
maintained an upbeat view of Latin American democratization, pausing but briefly
to refer to Chávez as an “untypical throwback.”246
But after Chávez won, and especially when early actions including the
constitutional initiative, removing US troops from, and banning of US over-‐flights of
Venezuela (many of which were part of the US interventions in Colombia) the
United States, through the NED, ramped up its financing of oppositional groups.
Scott and Steele summarize how NED grants to so-‐called democracy groups in
Venezuela went from $1 million in the whole previous decade to $2 million in
2002-‐2003 alone, in “efforts to resist the (democratic) backsliding of the regime.” 247
Elsewhere American foreign policy critic, William Blum, likens NED to a “Trojan
horse” where what seem to be innocent gifts of democratization funding are actually
inciting all forms of opposition against Chávez: “From 1999 to 2004, NED heavily
funded members of the opposition to President Hugo Chávez in Venezuela to
subvert his rule and to support a referendum to unseat him.”248 Notwithstanding,
within a few short years, Chávez had won his Presidential election, won the 246. Laurence Whitehead, “The Hazards of Convergence,” in Emerging Market Democracies: East Asia and Latin America, ed. Laurence Whitehead (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press and the National Endowment for Democracy, 2002), 83. 247. James M. Scott and Carie A. Steele. "Assisting Democrats or Resisting Dictators? The Nature and Impact of Democracy Support by the United States National Endowment for Democracy, 1990–99,” Democratization 12, no. 4 (2005): 439–460, doi:10.1080/13510340500225947. 248. William Blum, “Trojan Horse: The National Endowment for Democracy,” http://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-‐state/trojan-‐horse-‐the-‐national-‐endowment-‐for-‐democracy.
138
Constitutional referendum, and won re-‐election with multi-‐class support. The
importance and depth of these electoral mobilizations was be seen in 2002 when
the oligarchic class in Venezuela attempted a coup against Chávez with the support
of the United States.249
The People’s Movement for Chávez and the Overturning of a Coup
To understand the full reach of the United States and its unhesitating use of
direct intervention, let’s first consider what happened in the parallel situation of
Haiti with its popularly elected and social progressive President, who was also a
friend of Hugo Chávez’s. In 2004, President Jean-‐Bertrand Aristide was kidnapped
by U.S. forces, put on a plane, and taken out of his country, first to Central African
Republic, and then to the Republic of South Africa.250 Aristide would later confirm
that United States diplomats threatened him with the withdrawal of his U.S. security
detail which at that time was provided by a California firm, and that he and his
family would be killed by Guy Philippe, a death squad leader who was trained by the
United States military in the 1990s before he returned to Haiti. According to
Aristide, this United States diplomat came to Aristide’s home and told him that he
had to “go now.” Aristide said that the diplomat was accompanied by United States
marines. Aristide and his family left with the diplomat and boarded a plane with its
249. One of the participants in this research, Wayne Madsen, was an eyewitness to the U.S. support of the 2002 anti-‐Chávez coup attempt. 250. See Noam Chomsky, Paul Farmer and Amy Goodman, Getting Haiti Right This Time: The U.S. and the Coup (Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press, 2004). Details of behind-‐the-‐scenes planning and action were confirmed and expanded when cables from that time were released by WikiLeaks, information now openly available from Kim Ives and Ansel Herz, "WikiLeaks Haiti: The Aristide Files," The Nation, August 5, 2011, http://www.thenation.com/article/162598/wikileaks-‐haiti-‐aristide-‐files#.
139
destination unknown to him. The diplomat was identified by Congresswoman
Maxine Waters as someone she thought to be the Embassy’s Deputy Chief of
Mission, Ambassador Moreno. The world was told that Aristide had resigned. When
Aristide was able to make phone calls, he insisted that he had not resigned and that
a second coup had been carried out against his presidency.
That was 2004. It now seems that a “practice run” had been executed two
years before that, in Venezuela in 2002, that did not go as well. The failure was
attributable to the Venezuelan people’s mobilization in the aftermath of Chávez’s
kidnapping when they learned that he had not resigned, but instead had been
kidnapped, the first phase of the anti-‐Chávez coup d’état.
There is an eyewitness and minute-‐by-‐minute replay of the events recounted
by two participants in this research, Wayne Madsen and Al Giordano.
Wayne Madsen, a former Naval Intelligence and National Security Agency
Officer, was present at a Pentagon function at the time of the coup and learned of the
U.S. involvement first-‐hand as everyone’s cell phones went off during the reception
and everyone left the dinner. It was upon their return during the latter part of the
dinner that Wayne heard one Pentagon insider say, “We nailed the S.O.B.; we got rid
of Chávez.” That confirmed for Wayne U.S. participation in the coup effort against
Chávez. Wayne spoke of his experience in a story that was picked up by The
Observer, a London-‐based daily newspaper. Chávez just happened to have been in
Spain while Madsen was in France. Madsen received phone calls from journalists
because while at a Press Conference in Spain, Chávez pointed to Madsen’s quote in
The Observer to prove his assertion that the United States was behind the coup.
140
Madsen says that Chávez already knew that the United States was involved because
he saw the tail number of the plane that was waiting to carry him out of Venezuela.
“So, he knew the U.S. was involved without me.” Madsen remembers that a few years
later he had the chance to meet Chávez who recognized Madsen’s name; Chávez
gave Madsen a big bear hug.251
Giordano explains in riveting detail the people’s mobilization that saved the
Chávez Presidency. His website became “the first English language news outlet to
reveal that Chávez had not resigned, but that he had instead been kidnapped.”
Giordano reports that he used other bloggers as sources, like Mike Ruppert at “From
the Wilderness,” who had reached inside the U.S. military and reported that U.S.
warships were off the coast of Venezuela. Giordano adds, “Narconews was the first in
the English language to say that the Bush Administration was behind the coup, had
helped to plan it, and was stoking it.”
Giordano concludes that by taking back the media, the grassroots supporters
of Chávez ended up taking back the state. He says that the people “came down from
the hills and began occupying every public space, the state was ungovernable. Not a
shot was fired. It was a textbook case of nonviolent civil resistance.” Giordano
believes that this was the first time in the history of this hemisphere that an
attempted coup d’état was defeated by nonviolent resistance. He says, “I see that as
very important and historic to everything that came next in Latin America because a
year later, Brazil decides to elect Lula. Argentina and Ecuador and Bolivia each
251. Wayne Madsen, interview by author, January 18, 2014.
141
toppled two or three presidents in a row nonviolently—all of this is happening in
2003, 2004—and these countries are starting to elect guys.”
After the 2002 coup attempt was over, Giordano was personally and publicly
thanked by Chávez on his television show, Alo Présidente, along with the grassroots
community television operators who retook the state-‐owned television transmitter,
reopened the station, and began the call for people to come down from the hills into
Caracas. Giordano relates, “When Chávez walks into the studio, the people all stand
up and put their fists in the air and start singing this song, ‘El pueblo unido, jamas
sera vencido!’ And the President ends up putting his fist in the air and starts singing
with them. At that moment, the President realized that these people who might be
unruly, were a part of the Revolution.”
Hugo Chávez as Parrhesiastes
According to Michel Foucault, there are specific requirements for parrhesia
or “fearless speech” to exist. The orator must:
• Be in a position to remain silent, but choose to use his or her freedom to
tell the truth to people who are not ready to accept that truth;
• Voluntarily offer criticism out of a sense of moral duty;
• Tell the truth even at the risk of personal danger for doing so;
• Express him-‐ or her-‐self frankly because that is seen by the orator as a
duty in order to help other people.
Foucault illustrates the idea of Parrhesia in reference to standing up to the
classic Machiavellian-‐style Prince. It is an act of Parrhesia for anyone who dares to
point out the Prince’s weaknesses so as to help him become better than he is. The
142
orator who chooses chosen to speak this truth may do so at the risk of her or his life.
According to Foucault, such speakers use their freedom, choosing truth instead of
the silence of a lie; they may even risk death by offering criticism instead of flattery,
and by putting duty ahead of self-‐interest. This activity, Foucault calls parrhesia and
the person who engages in this kind of speech is called a Parrhesiastes.
For Hugo Chávez to be considered a Parrhesiastes, he would have had to
speak frankly when he could have remained silent. Moreover, he would have had to
candidly express his version of the truth to people who were not ready to accept
such words. In addition to that, he would have had to speak that truth to persons not
ready to accept that truth and who could do something to punish him for speaking
his truth. These persons could take away his freedom or even take away his life.
And, then, he would have to choose to speak anyway because of a sense of moral
duty to do so. All of these conditions must be present in order for us to consider
Hugo Chávez a Parrhesiastes. Let’s examine each of these criteria individually.
Hugo Chávez: Was Remaining Silent An Option?
The important consideration here is whether Hugo Chávez had the option of
remaining silent and more peacefully enjoying his days as President of Venezuela
and with little risk. Of course he did! The history books are filled with successful
people who have remained silent in the face of injustice, including politicians who
promised one thing in a political campaign only to actually do another after
successfully attaining the position of authority sought. Indeed, voters in the United
States as well as in Venezuela have experienced this disappointment. Could Hugo
Chávez have disappointed the voters of Venezuela in this manner, as did Carlos
143
Andres Perez before him? He certainly could have. He could have merely used his
socially progressive-‐sounding campaign as a political marketing tool just to gain
election.
Hugo Chávez could also have played that game on the other side, too. He
could have kept his options open and become very cozy with the United States
Embassy in Venezuela, saying as little as possible to them about his intentions
before and after he won the presidency. He did not do that despite the United States’
repeated and threatening condemnations about Chávez’s not listening to them and
that there was, therefore, no room in his agenda for U.S. counsel and input. As a
result, the United States engaged in an effort to contain Chávez’s influence in the
hemisphere and with Africa by isolating him on multiple levels simultaneously.
After the 2002 failed anti-‐Chávez coup attempt, Chávez could have
recalibrated and toned down his rhetoric so as to not invite a repeat of that
traumatic experience for himself or his country. He did not do that. In fact, on
January 11, 2003 at an urban land titling ceremony, Chávez said: “You all know that I
already belong to you. Now, what is left of my life, what God wills… every year that’s
left of my life, I will devote completely to the struggle for the Venezuelan people,
whom I love more than my life, because you are a heroic people, you are a beautiful
people, you are a great, heroic and liberating people.”252 On May 16, 2004, Chávez
gave a speech at a rally for peace in Caracas. During that speech, he confirmed his
decision to ask all U.S. military personnel in Venezuela to leave. In addition, he
announced the formation of popular homeland defense organizations as well as
252. Chávez, Fascist Coup, 135.
144
other measures to protect the Revolution from imperialism. In fact, he took the
opportunity of this speech to announce that the Bolivarian Revolution was now
about to advance to another stage—the Anti-‐Imperialism stage.253
All the while, from within Venezuela and from outside, clandestine forces
mounted against Chávez. On January 6, 2005, the Venezuelan Archbishop Baltazar
Porras told the U.S. Ambassador that the Church and the traditional labor
organizations and Venezuelan civil society were imperiled by Chávez’s policies.
According to the Archbishop, the Church saw its interests encroached upon by
Chávez’s activities inside poor neighborhoods, the educational system, and the
military. The Archbishop described Chávez to the Ambassador as a long-‐term
problem.254
In the region, the United States reached out to Peru and encouraged its
government to continue in a policy of containment of Chávez while the United States
would use an NGO (CANVAS), labor, and human rights contacts inside Peru to
253. Chávez’s words were: “La revolución bolivariana . . . ha entrado en la etapa antiimperialista” (“the Bolivarian revolution . . . is entering the anti-‐imperialist stage”). Quoted in Marco Aponte Moreno, “Metaphors in Hugo Chávez’s Political Discourse: Conceptualizing Nation, Revolution, and Opposition” (Ph.D. diss., City University of New York, 2008), 137. See also reference to the speech and the announcement of “the anti-‐imperialist character of the Bolivarian Revolution,” in Jorge Martin, “The Transition to Socialism in Venezuela: What is to be Done?” In Defence of Marxism, March 5, 2015, http://www.marxist.com/the-‐transition-‐to-‐socialism-‐in-‐venezuela-‐what-‐is-‐to-‐be-‐done.htm. 254. Justina, “WikiLeaks Impacts Venezuela, Exposes Traitor,” Daily Kos, December 14, 2010, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/12/14/923066/-‐WikiLeaks-‐Impacts-‐Venezuela-‐Exposes-‐Traitor.
145
publicly criticize the government of Venezuela.255 It was clear that the United States
would stop at nothing in its “global lobbying campaign”256 against Chávez’s bid for a
Venezuelan seat on the UN Security Council.257 Covert efforts by the United States
were revealed: that the United States pressured Chile, even threatening to not train
pilots for the F-‐16s it was then in the process of selling to Chile if that nation
supported Chávez’s bid;258 questioned Jamaica’s mixed messages;259 and tried to
counter Chávez’s lobbying for the position in Malaysia.260
By 2010, the Serbian-‐based Center for Non Violent Action and Strategies
(CANVAS), formerly known as OPTOR, an NGO seen as instrumental to regime
change in its home country, was busily engaged in assessing the vulnerabilities of
Chávez and his government. 261 That this planning work was closely linked to the
255. Dawn Paley, “WikiLeaks Cables of Interest on Latin America, Released May 9–22, 2011,” Upside Down World, May 23, 2011, http://upsidedownworld.org/main/news-‐briefs-‐archives-‐68/3044-‐wikileaks-‐cables-‐of-‐interest-‐on-‐latin-‐america-‐released-‐may-‐9-‐22-‐2011. 256. Bill Varner, “Chávez’s Push for UN Council Seat Sets Up a Showdown with U.S.,” Bloomberg, October 11, 2006, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/ news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aHbR19zyxptU&refer=news. 257. COHA, “Venezuela’s Candidacy for the UN Security Council Appears on Track,” Council on Hemispheric Affairs, August 10, 2006, http://www.coha.org/venezuela’s-‐candidacy-‐for-‐the-‐un-‐security-‐council-‐appears-‐on-‐track/. 258. Paul Richter and Maggie Farley, “U.S. Is Aiming to Block Chávez,” Los Angeles Times, June 19, 2006, http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jun/19/world/fg-‐venezuela19. 259. Robert Buddan, “Foreign Diplomacy and Local Democracy,” The Gleaner, June 5, 2011, http://jamaica-‐gleaner.com/gleaner/20110605/focus/focus3.html. 260. Reuters, “Venezuela Gains Support of Malaysia in UN Bid,” Montreal Gazette, August 28, 2006, http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/ story.html?id=0a3e7c15-‐d1bb-‐4cb5-‐9f43-‐984be8f12fda. 261. CANVAS Analytic Department, “Analysis of the Situation in Venezuela, September 2010. (DRAFT)”, http://www.canvasopedia.org/images/books/ analysis/ Venezuela_Anlysis_sep_2010.pdf?pdf=Analysis-‐Venezuela.
146
U.S.-‐based privately-‐owned intelligence organization, Stratfor, was compellingly
asserted by news sources who viewed the WikiLeaks cable releases of 2011.262
At any one of these points of challenge, Chávez could have backed down or
relinquished engagement. Instead, he forged ahead and continued to speak out,
stating his truth.
Hugo Chávez: Was His Challenge to Washington Seen As a Moral Duty?
Chávez quoted Spanish revolutionary Miguel Hernandez when he announced
in his Annual Message to the National Assembly in Caracas on January 17, 2003 that
the winds of the people “pull me” and “fan my throat.” He went on to say that it was
“these powerful and legendary winds, the wind of the people’s cause that come from
so far away in time, which are now being felt in Venezuela, and becoming invincible
winds of victory, despite all the adversities and against all the obstacles.” Even at a
time when Chávez stared death in the face during the 2002 failed coup attempt and
the three days of his kidnapping and detainment, he recalled a brief conversation
that he had with an officer. He said, “My personal fate was totally uncertain. My
status was that of an imprisoned president.” He told the young officer who was
guarding him, “I am not I, it is a people.” Chávez went on to say that on that day, he
spoke “with the conviction and steadfastness of one who swears an oath, of one who
has sealed and is sealing once again a sacred commitment.”263
262. For example, see “WikiLeaks Revela Complots Imperialistas de EE.UU. contra Hugo Chávez,” RT Sepa Más, February 24, 2013, http://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/view/87373-‐nuevas-‐filtraciones-‐wikileaks-‐revelan-‐complots-‐eeuu-‐hugo-‐chavez. Also see Paul Dobson, “WikiLeaks Reveals Imperialist Plots Against Venezuela,” Green Left, February 24, 2013, https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/53422. 263. Chávez, Fascist Coup, 161.
147
He made two additional points in this conversation: first was that Venezuela
is a sovereign and capable country, and second, that Venezuelans should be able to
talk to each other—Government and Opposition—and discuss ideas that are good
for Venezuela. He admitted that he had privately met with the leaders of the
opposition parties and the Church. He admitted that Venezuela needed an
Opposition that discussed ideas and that abided by the Constitution. He announced,
however, that he would not engage in backroom politics represented by “pacts
among the ruling classes.” On the former matter, Chávez stated publicly, “Venezuela
is not and will not be a country under anyone’s guardianship. Venezuela is, and will
always be, a free and sovereign country, that adopts its own laws and solves its own
problems. Its own people have the mechanisms to solve them.”264 Chávez
acknowledged the moral strength, integrity, endurance, intelligence, and awareness
on the part of the people, the institutions, the military, and in general in turning back
the efforts of the oligarchs to destabilize Venezuela.
Indeed, Venezuelan Woman #4 of my participants discusses the spiritual
aspect of Chávez’s relationship with the people, also mentioned by Zuquete265 in his
discussion of the “missionary” aspects of Chávez’s politics. Chávez often referenced
his Cross or made the Sign of the Cross during his remarks. Chávez’s open
spirituality and articulation of his values resonated with the people. Indeed, we
learn that Chávez’s religious practices bonded him with the masses of the
Venezuelan people. 264. Ibid., 161–202. 265. Jose Pedro Zuquete, “The Missionary Politics of Hugo Chávez” Latin American Politics and Society 50, no. 1 (2008): 91–120, doi:10.1111/j.1548-‐2456.2008.00005.x.
148
Jeanette Charles is a recent graduate of Scripps College who, at the time of
this writing, lives in Venezuela studying the relationship between Bolivarian
Venezuela and Haiti. Charles is a nominee for a Fulbright Scholarship and a 2010
recipient of a Thomas J. Watson Fellowship. Charles spoke of Chávez’s spirituality in
my interview with her and the fact that Chávez advocated religious freedom.
Ironically, according to Charles, many Venezuelans who do not self-‐identify as
African-‐descendant practice African-‐origin religions. Charles believes this is a
reflection of a growing trend of Venezuelans to explore and embrace their African
roots, just as Chávez had done to embrace his own heritage. Anonymously, I was
told that Chávez practiced two African religions: Ifa and Santeria. Ifa is the religion
of the Yoruba people of Nigeria, and Santeria, prevalent in the Caribbean, is a
religion that is a combination of Catholicism and African religions.
Hugo Chávez: Did His Speech Put Him at Risk?
The third criterion for parrhesia to be present is that the free speech, the
truth frankly spoken, puts the speaker in danger. That danger could be the
restriction of the speaker’s freedom to speak or it could be life threatening. This
third element was evident during the failed anti-‐Chávez 2002 coup attempt, where
Chávez’s ability to continue speaking at the level of the Presidency was nearly cut
short.
The COINTELPRO Papers, and the findings of the Church Committee that
investigated COINTELPRO, disclose covert activities of the FBI and the CIA in the
name of national security. In their shocking report, the bipartisan investigating
Senators found that the American people, through their tax dollars, had paid for
149
illegal and immoral electronic surveillance; infiltration, dirty tricks, public opinion
manipulation by cultivation of friendly media journalists and outlets willing to
publish lies about the leaders of social movements; break-‐ins, IRS targeting, and
more. Targeted assassinations were also investigated and exposed in the area of
foreign activities. The Committee concluded that “government officials—including
those whose principle duty is to enforce the law—have violated or ignored the law
over long periods of time and have advocated and defended their right to break the
law.”266 Ominously, the Committee found that tactics honed in matters of foreign
intrigue found their way back home, being used domestically against U.S. citizen
targets not affiliated in any way with foreign governments.267
As has been discussed earlier, Chávez would have known about the risks of
his chosen path because of his friendship with Fidel Castro, the Cuban President
known to have survived at least eight acknowledged attempts on his life, as
explained by the Church Committee. In fact, we know that Chávez and Castro had at
least one such conversation because Chávez mentioned it publicly when discussing
his cancer and the strange coincidence of Chávez-‐friendly Latin American Presidents
having experienced cancer. I think it is clear that, based on the United States
government documented track record in these matters, Chávez’s speech, not only
266. U.S. Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans, Book II, April 23, 1976, 94th Congress. Rep. No. 94-‐755, at 5, http://www.aarclibrary.org/ publib/church/reports/book2/pdf/ChurchB2_1_Introduction.pdf. 267. U.S. Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, Supplementary Detailed Staff Reports on Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans, April 23, 1976, 94th Congress. Rep. No. 94-‐755, http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/book3/html/ChurchB3_0007a.htm.
150
put him in danger of losing his freedom to speak from his unique position as
President of a country, it also put him in danger of losing his life. In additon to
Castro’s experiences, Chávez would also have followed the tragic death of his hero
from Panama, General Omar Torrijos.
Hugo Chávez: Did He Frankly Speak His Truth?
Hugo Chávez’s 2006 Speech at the Opening Session of the United Nations
General Assembly is a strong example of frankly speaking his truth. On that
September 20, 2006 morning, he made history by calling George W. Bush a devil. He
introduced his remarks by mentioning Noam Chomsky’s book268 about the U.S.
Empire placing humanity at risk. Chávez called on the United States to halt this
greatest threat to the planet. He said that the people of the United States must surely
read Chomsky’s book because it is the citizens of the United States who are firstly at
risk. He said that “the devil” is in their own house. He appealed to the people of the
United States and the world to halt this threat.
He said while making the Sign of the Cross, The devil came here yesterday. Yesterday, the devil came here. Right here. Right here. And it smells of sulfur still today. This table that I am now standing in front of, yesterday, ladies and gentleman, from this rostrum, the President of the United States, the gentleman whom I refer to as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world. Truly, as the owner of the world. I think we could call a psychiatrist to analyze yesterday’s statement made by the President of the United States. As the spokesman of imperialism, he came to share his nostrums; to try to preserve the current pattern of domination, exploitation, and pillage of the peoples of the world. An Alfred Hitchcock movie could use it as a scenario; I will even propose a title: The Devil’s Recipe. As Chomsky says here, clearly and in depth, the American Empire is
268. Noam Chomsky, Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2003).
151
doing all it can to consolidate its hegemonic system of domination. We cannot allow world dictatorship to be consolidated.269
Chávez continued to state that the United States represents the elite while it
speaks of democracy, but imposes that democracy with bombs. He said that
President Bush would look at the color of someone’s skin and conclude that that
person is a terrorist. Chávez continued that despite hostile reactions from the
United States, people are standing up all over the world for equality, sovereignty of
nations, and rising up against the model of domination. Chávez said that those in
doubt should take a walk on the streets of the United States in the Bronx or San
Francisco; the citizens will say that they want peace. But, he asserted, the United
States does not want peace, it wants war and threatens the people of Iran and
Venezuela. He called the United States and Israel fascist empires that kill people, like
the Palestinians. It is clear that Hugo Chávez spoke his truth frankly.
Hugo Chávez: Did He Speak Frankly to Help People?
In 2005, Hugo Chávez addressed the United Nations and spoke of the need
for United Nations reform because the model was an exhausted one, in his opinion.
He said that the world is interconnected and that the peoples of the world must
spread their wings and fly. This means leaving neoliberalism behind, because
neoliberalism has left too many poor people behind. Mentioning Iraq and Palestine,
Chávez said that if international law continued to be broken, then perhaps it is time
to move the United Nations from the United States He proposed an international city
269. Full speech begins at 1:01:19 at http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/ga/61/ga060920am.rm.
.
152
to host the idea of planetary unity. This, he said, was an idea that originally came
from Simon Bolivar.
Chávez spoke of transnational problems, like energy, environment and
blamed a socioeconomic model that is so destructive. He named the neoliberal
capitalism, the Washington Consensus that is a tragedy for the world’s people.
Chávez called for a new international order. He then recounted the meaning of the
Bolivarian Revolution to the people of Venezuela: “In just seven years of Bolivarian
Revolution, the people of Venezuela can claim important social and economic
advances.”270 He went on to name them:
• One million four hundred and six thousand Venezuelans learned to read;
in a few days, Venezuela was to be declared an illiteracy-‐free territory. He
added that three million Venezuelans who were too poor to study, are
now a part of the primary, secondary, or higher studies;
• Seventeen million Venezuelans, almost seventy percent of the population,
receive for the first time, universal health care, including medicine. He
announced that in a few years, every Venezuelan would have access to
excellent healthcare service.
• Over twelve million Venezuelans receive subsidized food, with one
million getting food totally for free;
• Over seven hundred thousand new jobs have been created reducing
unemployment by nine points.
270. For full written text of his 2005 UN address, see “President Chávez’s Speech to the United Nations,” venezuelanalysis.com, trans. Nestor Sanchez, http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1365.
153
Chávez concluded his remarks by saying that his fight is for Venezuela, for
Latin America, and for the World. “Now”, he asserted, “is the time to not allow our
hands to be idle or our souls to rest until we save humanity.”271
In his 2006 Speech before the United Nations, Chávez said that he wanted to
be a part of the creation of a better world. He mentioned that those who perpetrated
the crimes against Chile are free still. Those who killed 73 innocents by downing a
plane containing athletes, are free.272 He accused the United States of having a
double standard, protecting its terrorists, and fighting others. He mentioned that the
people who led the coup against him in 2002 are free, protected by the United States
government. Chávez announced also the launching of the Non-‐Aligned Movement. A
new strong movement has been born—a movement of the South. He ended by
saying that he wanted ideas to save the planet with a world of peace, with a renewed
United Nations. Chávez received rousing applause from those who remained to hear
him in a mostly empty Chamber. Conspicuously absent during Chávez’s remarks was
the U.S. delegation.
271. Ibid. 272. Chávez was referring here to Luis Posada Carriles who, with accomplices, blew up a Cubana airliner carrying Venezuelan athletes. The FBI’s attaché in Caracas provided the man who placed the bomb on the plane a visa to the United States five days before the bombing. Posada was in regular contact with the FBI and the CIA and reportedly stated in advance that a Cuban airliner was going to be hit. The archives state that there is no indication that Cuba was alerted that its planes were under threat. For the declassified record on Posada, see “Luis Posada Carriles: The Declassified Record, CIA and FBI Documents Detail Career in International Terrorism; Connection to U.S. National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 153” The National Security Archive, May 10, 2005, http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB153/.
154
While the best-‐selling work of French Economist, Thomas Piketty, on wealth
inequality found that it grows naturally as modern economies expand,273, the
Bolivarian Republic seems to be moving in the opposite direction. Venezuela was
praised by the United Nations for drastically reducing childhood hunger, infant
mortality, and maternal childbirth mortality. The United Nations representative
announced that Venezuela had met its goals in children’s rights and children’s
education. Venezuela’s Project Canaima, which distributes laptops to primary and
high school students, was awarded a prize in 2013 for its pioneering work in
technical literacy. Venezuela’s Housing Minister announced that Venezuela was on
track to deliver over seven hundred thousand new units by the end of 2014.
Construction is being carried out by volunteers, public servants, and some private
companies that have won government contracts.274
It should be clear from the foregoing discussion that Hugo Chávez spoke
frankly his version of the truth in order to help people, just a few people but the vast
majority of the Venezuelan population. The most recent United Nations
announcement is testimony to the progress that Venezuela experienced during the
period of Chávez’s leadership.
Hugo Chávez: Does Being President of a Country Impede Parrhesia?
I believe that it should be clear that President Hugo Chávez satisfies the
requirements for parrhesia as outlined by Michel Foucault. It could be argued that
273. Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-‐First Century, trans. Arthur Goldhammer, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014). 274. Arlene Eisen, “United Nations, UNICEF Praise Venezuelan Equality As Government Takes on Steep Housing Goals,” venezuelanalysis.com, May 9, 2014, http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/10672.
155
no matter where Hugo Chávez had landed professionally, that he would have been
an outspoken leader. I posit here that being President moved him into a better
position to speak more freely, to help more people, to try and help even his
adversary—the neoliberal United States of America—become a better international
citizen. But it also moved him into even greater danger. Because Hugo Chávez was a
president of a small South American country does not mean that his speech is less
frank, less truthful, or less risky. I argue, that in fact, at that level of political
responsibility, there is all the more reason to remain silent because the pitfalls of
outspokenness and insisting on national dignity and sovereignty are well known.
His position as President of Venezuela made his speech even more risky. Therefore,
I posit here that President Hugo Chávez chose to speak the truth, frankly, in order to
help people, and that that speech put him in danger—a risk that he accepted
because of the strength of his convictions and his moral courage.
Hugo Chávez As an Exemplary African-‐Centered Political Leader
This section blends the thoughts of Assensoh and Hotep on political and
African-‐Centered leadership, respectively, to reach a further understanding of Hugo
Chávez’s leadership qualities. Both authors express an ideal type of political
leadership that is also Pan-‐African in orientation. According to Assensoh, exemplary
African political leaders fight hard for African liberation as did the three leaders that
he profiled: Jomo Kenyatta, Kwame Nkrumah, and Julius Nyerere. All inherited state
structures that did not serve the needs or interests of the Africans they were
determined to serve. Decolonization meant transforming those state structures to
ones that worked for the people. In addition to this type of state transformation, all
156
three of the political leaders chosen by Assensoh expanded African liberation
beyond the borders of their state by their own methods, in a nod to Pan-‐Africanism.
All also had to deal with corruption, economic dysfunction, and disappointment.
Assensoh bases his examination of these exemplars on their success at
nation-‐building, their work to improve the status of women, and the record of their
leadership in political conflict or repression. According to Assensoh, they all excelled
in stating a Pan-‐Africanist vision and a commitment to nation-‐building; each leader
instituted socialist policies for development and preferenced indigenous over
foreign trade and ownership, especially of essential items like rice, maize, and sugar.
The three were uneven in their promotion of the status of women with Kenyatta
lagging behind Nyerere and Nkrumah. In the area of repression of opponents,
Kenyatta was accused of being too lenient with foreign interests and faced a split
that was put down ferociously. According to Assensoh, Nkrumah made “remarkable”
progress on nation-‐building, including having women in his Cabinet, but fared
poorly in the handling of political opposition—although Assensoh concludes that
various governments, not just Nkrumah’s, violated the Ghanaian Constitution.
Assensoh writes that corruption in the three countries was no worse than in other
African countries at that time. Nyerere chose to retire from politics and allow others
to try their leadership skills, especially in addressing the matter of corruption.
Uhuru Hotep takes his African-‐Centered Leadership-‐Followership model
even further and states explicitly that authentic African-‐centered leaders mobilize
their constituents to construct sovereign, life-‐sustaining organizations that are
157
institutionalized and passed on to future generations. According to Hotep, an
African-‐centered leader must (among other things):
• Think like a free and independent African with vision and courage;
• Believe in the righteousness of the struggle for sovereignty;
• Be goal-‐oriented, confident, and loyal;
• Maintain historical connectedness in connection to nation building; and
• Stress the importance of collective work and cooperative economics in
pursuit of goals.
Just as Chávez spoke of the new type of man that would be created by a turn
away from neoliberalism and a turn toward twenty-‐first century socialism, Hotep’s
paradigm also seeks to create a new leader-‐follower that he calls an “intellectual
maroon,” someone who has been freed from the psychological baggage of
colonialism (and its variants) so well described by Fanon. I posit here that Hugo
Chávez’s legacy of leadership on race places him as an exemplary African-‐centered
leader. I will examine both Assensoh’s and Hotep’s paradigms in relation to the
legacy of Hugo Chávez on race.
Hugo Chávez As Nation Builder
Like Kenyatta, Nyerere, and Nkrumah, Chávez, on winning the Presidency of
Venezuela in 1998, inherited a political structure and apparatus that was not
designed to serve all of the people of Venezuela. Thus, the challenge was to build
new institutions and organizations as well as decolonizing the minds of the people
long oppressed because they were not European. Chávez initiated his project of
nation-‐building in two ways: reform of existing institutions, like the military; and
158
initiation of new institutions as does the Constitution he championed. In terms of
the military, the government integrated it more with civilian authority and rooted
out corruption that caused even the media in 1998 to heap scorn on the political
system that existed at that time of the run-‐up to the election. It was the corruption of
the generals that had led Chávez and others inside the military to rebel in 1992.
Many inside the military were ready for change. Of course, Chávez was intimately
aware of what was right and what was wrong with the military because that is
where he became knowledgeable about Venezuela and the rest of the world. He also
learned about Latin American revolutionary politics there. Chávez also extended
contacts with other South American militaries through the organization that he
founded, UNASUR (Union of South American Nations).
George Ciccariello-‐Maher, author of We Created Chávez: A People’s History of
the Venezuelan Revolution, observes that military transformation has occurred away
from hierarchical structures to a grassroots strategy that includes popular militias.
In interview, Ciccariello-‐Maher said he believes that this will allow Bolivarian
Venezuela to “resist a threat from the United States, but also a threat from a military
coup, or a rightist turn.”
Part of nation-‐building is creating and allowing space for the development of
political talent that can lead the country. Besides bestowing civil and human rights
to all the people of Venezuela, the Constitutional process also gave the most talented
and politically-‐inclined citizens an opportunity to run for office at many different
positions of authority, thereby creating a reservoir of leadership skills on which
Venezuela could call. This was a hugely important task as in 1999, when Chávez
159
took over as President, as more than thirteen million Venezuelans—over half the
population—had less than subsistence income. At the other end of the income
spectrum, neoliberal structural adjustment in Venezuela had done what Piketty
found in his more general examination of wealth inequality: it concentrated more
wealth in the hands of an even smaller percentage of the population. Lander and
Fierro also describe the transformation needed as the change from a rentier society
to one in which collective and individual work was supported.275
Another aspect of nation-‐building is an outgrowth of the drive for a new
constitution and its implementation The 1999 Bolivarian Constitution provides,
among other things, for the right to housing, the right to work, freedom of peaceful
assembly, gender equality, and it specifically recognizes the right to culture of all
Venezuelans and includes specific mention of indigenous rights. There is a Ministry
of Women’s Affairs and Gender Equality and a Ministry of Indigenous Affairs. When
confronted by Early and others on the lack of specificity for Afro-‐Venezuelans,
Chávez agreed that there was more work that needed to be done on that aspect of
the Constitution.
Chávez built a number of multilateral institutions because he was not
satisfied to liberate Venezuela only; he also wanted to liberate the peoples of the
Caribbean and Africa.
Hugo Chávez As a Feminist
My participant, Venezuelan Woman #2 related her personal story of how
Hugo Chávez’s 1999 Bolivarian Constitution gave her rights that she had never
275. Lander and Fierro, “Impact of Neoliberal Adjustment.” (see n. 82 above.)
160
before enjoyed as a Venezuelan citizen. As a woman, she said, she believes in the
leadership of Hugo Chávez because she was directly, and personally, impacted by
him. She said that Hugo Chávez was a feminist and that he freed women. She also
believes that Chávez created political and cultural space for Afro-‐Venezuelan voices
and an Afro-‐Venezuelan presence.276
Venezuelan Woman #1 described herself as a Feminist cartoonist. Although
living in an Opposition neighborhood, she supported Chávez and the Bolivarian
Revolution. She was eager to voice her opinion on what is happening in Venezuela.
She complained that they propagandize “the kids from the middle classes” and that
propaganda, combined with “lies and manipulation, induces violence to justify a
coup against the government.” She added “the kids don't dare go into the poor
neighborhoods so they remain in the rich and middle class neighborhoods.” It was at
that point that I realized that she lives in either a middle class or rich neighborhood
because “the kids” were outside her home at two in the morning and it was hard for
her to hear me because the pots and pans were banging so loudly. She also
complained that the Opposition is racist and gave some examples, which will be
discussed in the next few sections.
Jeanette Charles agreed with our two Venezuelan women that Chávez was a
feminist. She described him as a feminist, a socialist, and an anti-‐imperialist. She
maintains that from her experience in Venezuela today, she finds that the people are
trying to incorporate socialism and feminism into their own daily practice.
Venezuelan Woman #4 cited Chávez’s support for and creation of the Women’s
276. For Hugo Chávez’s impact on the life of Venezuelan Woman #2, see Appendix C.
161
Development Bank (BanMujer), a microcredit institution that provides both
financial and non-‐financial services (like small business training) to women as an
example of Chávez’s pro-‐woman policies. Five of seven women interviewed agreed
that Chávez was, indeed, a feminist. The sixth woman was more interested in telling
me that she knew for a fact that Chávez had read C.L.R. James’s book about the
Haitian Revolution and so we did not speak about feminism or policies toward
women. This woman, a Cuban scholar, wanted me to know that Chávez was
pro-‐Caribbean. And the issue of Chávez’s feminism was not mentioned by
Venezuelan Woman #3.
Repression and Charges of Corruption under Hugo Chávez
Although Assensoh classified Nyerere, Nkrumah, and Kenyatta as exemplars
for their vision, leadership, organizational skills, and legacy, he acknowledges that
as heads of State, each also had to deal with the temptations that come with high
office (of the leader or the inner circle) and the wielding of state power when
political opposition arose. While Assensoh says that comparatively these leaders
were not significantly worse than other African leaders of their time, it is important
to learn from these examples in order for an even more visionary generation of
African political leaders to mature and come forward. Journalist Giordano directly
addresses the issue of repression under Chávez. In our interview, Giordano speaks
from a journalist’s point of view:
Not one reporter went to jail under his watch. Were there mistakes, were there abuses, did he get over the top with his rhetoric at times—yes. But I would have taken my chances as a dissident or as a radical journalist in Venezuela. The international press freedom and human rights organizations viciously attacked the Chávez Administration. It revealed to us what the international NGO machine is really all about: preserving the status quo
162
rather than human rights or press freedom or its about press freedom for corporate media but when the city government of Caracas is rounding up community journalists, not a peep from the Committee to protect journalists. Venezuela was, for a number of years, a way to wage an international teach-‐in on a whole host of issues.
Giordano also speaks of the way Chávez used the media to instill
accountability of the government to the public. Giordano explains: “On his TV show,
he would have his Cabinet sitting off to the side in the studio. And when he took a
call, then he would have the Cabinet member with jurisdiction over that area, come
up on the stage and receive instructions on what was expected of him. Then, Chávez
would add that he wanted that Cabinet member to come back one week later and
tell what he had done to resolve that constituent’s problem.”
Writing in the introduction to Marcano and Tyszka’s book 277, Moises Naim
relates how a journalist for The Miami Herald discovered that Chávez was a hero all
the way over in India. When that journalist was disputed in his speech by young
Indians and professors who applauded Chávez’s attack on neoliberalism and the
elite. Naim, an opponent of Chávez, admits that Chávez had three causes into which
he enlisted the Venezuelan people: corruption, injustice, and inequality.
Marcano and Tyszka also relate a relevant story told to them by Jésus
Urdaneta Hernandez, who ended up resigning from the Chávez Administration.
Urdaneta says that he complained to Chávez about the corruption of two of his
Cabinet Members. Chávez received the information patiently, but asked Urdaneta to
be patient because those two lieutenants had expertise lacking among the
revolutionaries. None had the knowledge and expertise that the two Urdaneta
277. Marcano and Tyszka, Hugo Chávez.
163
accused of corruption had. Chávez asked Urdaneta to be patient and at least allow
the Constitution to be put in place. Urdaneta did wait, but eventually tendered his
resignation because he lost confidence in Chávez’s handling of the two Cabinet
members. One of the accused Cabinet Members became the first in the Chávez
Administration to be tried and charged with corruption. He was acquitted of those
charges at trial. In fact, the seasoned politicians had old ways and the
revolutionaries wanted Chávez to take a more forceful stand against those old ways.
They were disappointed when he did not.
Hugo Chávez, the Pan-‐Africanist
The way the story goes, as told to me by Jeanette Charles, Chávez first spoke
to his African heritage on his weekly television show, “Alo Presidente.” In 2005, an
Afro-‐Venezuelan called into the show to complain about racial discrimination in
Venezuela and Chávez’s response was something to the effect of “We can’t have that
because I’m Afro-‐descended, too!” For this, Ray Winbush,278 believes that Chávez is
one of the most important Latin American leaders of our time and has been a fan of
his for a long time. Early agrees noting that Chávez’s entry into the world of African
identity was a relatively recent one—at least in terms of his public discourse. He
believes that Hugo Chávez was unique among Latin American leaders for his
willingness to discuss his identity and his African heritage. Early has this to say of
Chávez on the issue of race: “There is no Latin American leader, and that incudes
Fidel Castro, who spoke more forthrightly and consistently on the matter of race. 278. Director of the Institute of Urban Research at Morgan State University, an institution with the designation “Historically Black College or University (HBCU).” He is the author of Belinda’s Petition: A Concise History of Reparations for the Trans-‐Atlantic Slave Trade (Xlibris.com, 2009).
164
Not just in metaphors, but by noting, in his own terms, that his grandmother was
Black. Hugo Chávez spoke about his grandmother and then a few months later in an
interview he talked about his thick lips and his curly hair. He felt deeply about this
issue and he was called a monkey, reflecting his admixture biologically. He felt very
close to Black and Indigenous communities.”
In a meeting with Chávez, Early recalls raising the issue of race, and Chávez
gave him a very sincere and quick response. “He was not coy about his feelings. You
always knew how he felt.” Early says that Chávez celebrated the African part of his
ancestry. He did not have a long history of speaking about race. But when the issue
was put before him, he had a swift and synthesizing mind. He heard something that
seemed true to him and said, “We left Black people out of the 1999 Constitution and
we have to go back and correct that.” By contrast, Early asked Fidel about race and
racism, and recounts the exchange: Castro “curiously” told Early to “speak with
Chávez about that.” Early notes the contrast with Chávez on the topic of race and
racism. He adds, “On the issues of race, Hugo Chávez was just so much more
dynamic, sensitive, responsive. That’s not to put down Fidel Castro, but that is to say
that even a Fidel Castro, when it came to such questions as identity, he says, speak to
Chávez about that.”279
Winbush focuses on reparations and regional and Continental integration. He
says, Chávez “always talked about reparations even though the media didn’t call it
that. After nationalizing the oil company, which infuriated the West, he turned the
279. James Early, interview by author, January 22, 2014.
165
oil revenues back to the people—similar to what Qaddafi was doing in Libya.” 280
Winbush says that this act changed the very fabric of Venezuelan society—“socially,
educationally, and the relationship between the military and civilian society, and
control of the resources of the country. He didn’t just move wealth to Venezuela, he
also wanted regional unity among South American nations.” Winbush adds, “I regret
that he didn’t live long enough to see the eleven Caribbean nations now that are
suing their former colonial masters for reparations. He would have been thrilled
about that.” Winbush continued, “The U.S. used its propaganda machine to demonize
Chávez. I believe there will be a lot of them over there in the Caribbean like Chávez.
There will be more people on the African Continent doing the same thing. Chávez
spread the Bolivarian idea throughout the world.”281
Molefi Asante, currently Chair of the African American Studies Department at
Temple University and originator of the theory of Afrocentricity.282 He agrees on the
enduring influence and adds, “This is not the last time that we will see the Hugo
Chávez model.”283
Chávez also showed his Pan-‐Africanist orientation when he did not reject a
Caribbean identity—as was common to do in European Venezuelans’ policy—and
embraced the Caribbean in PetroCaribe. This was Chávez’s pan-‐Caribbean
development organization, where Early explains, Chávez “subsidized oil for
280. Ray Winbush, interview by author, January 21, 2014. 281. Ibid. 282. Molefi Asante, Afrocentricity: The Theory of Social Change. (Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press, 1990). Molefi Asante is currently Chair of the African American Studies Department at Temple University. He created the first Ph.D. program in African American Studies at Temple University. 283. Molefi Asante, interview by author, January 23, 2014.
166
developing countries from the profits he made by selling oil to the developed
countries.” CELAC, the Community of Caribbean and Latin American States, another
Chávez product, united the multi-‐lingual Caribbean and Latin American states into
one strong organization that did not have the United States or Canada as members.
Donald H. Smith284 sees Chávez’s legacy on race as not just Venezuelan. He
believes that Chávez helped Black people all over the world and that he did great
damage to global White Supremacy. Smith says that when Hugo Chávez
acknowledged his African roots, “Chávez was making a very important statement,
not only for Latin America, but for people of African ancestry everywhere.” Smith
characterized Chávez as a fearless leader. He visited Venezuela before Hugo Chávez
became President and saw that people of African ancestry there were neglected and
had very little support. Smith says, “The United States and its allies recognized that
Chávez had the potential to energize people of African descent, not only in Latin
America, but in other parts of the world and was seen as a nemesis and someone
who could do great damage to White Supremacy.”285 Smith served as a delegate to
the United Nations World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) in Durban, South
Africa in 2001. He says that Chávez was right there at the midpoint of helping people
of African ancestry throughout the world to recognize enslavement and the historic
deprivations that they had been subjected to “and so he was seen as a great threat to
284. Smith is professor emeritus of education at Baruch College where he served as Associate Provost. He is also the former Chair of the New York City Board of Education’s Commission on Students of African Descent and also served as President of the National Alliance of Black School Educators. 285. Donald H. Smith, interview by author, February 26, 2014.
167
White supremacy.”286 Smith goes further in his comments. He recounts that the
WCAR found that slavery was a crime against humanity and that people who had
been enslaved were due recompense. Durban, Smith says, was a very significant
world moment. Smith believes that unity among states of the Southern Hemisphere
—sometimes called the South-‐South Dialogue— “is a threat to White supremacy, a
threat to the United States, to Europe, to Australia where White people have
historically been in control and have benefited from the work of enslaved
Africans.”287 According to Smith, “This was a clear threat and was recognized as
such.”288
Chávez knew exactly what he was doing and for whom he was doing it. Aleida
Guevara, Ché’s daughter, a physician in Cuba who has treated people in Angola and
other parts of Latin America, interviewed Chávez in 2005. She begins the
Introduction to her book with the following quote from Chávez: “This is a different
Venezuela, where the wretched of the earth know that they can free themselves
from their past. And this is a different Latin America.”289
Chávez became so comfortable in his skin that he openly and repeatedly
welcomed the election of the United States’ first African-‐American Barack Obama in
2008. While expressing dismay about Obama’s subsequent international policies, to
his life ‘s end Chávez’s seemed to maintain the hope that Obama would, like himself
286. Ibid. 287. Ibid. 288. Ibid. 289. Aleida Guevara, Chávez: Venezuela and the New Latin America (Melbourne: Ocean Press, 2005), 5.
168
eventually embrace closer empathy and connection with African nations and with
African-‐Americans of Latin America.290
Hugo Chávez: Thinking Like an Independent African with Vision and Courage
Based on what we know from Fanon, Freire, and others, it is impossible to
think as an independent African with vision and courage without first having dealt
with the internalization of attitudes that come from racism, domination, and
oppression. One of this study’s participants, Lewis Gordon291 gives us a glimpse into
what that kind of identity work must be like. Gordon believes that Chávez is the
Latin American “Steve Biko,” awakening Black consciousness in Latin America just
as Biko had done in apartheid South Africa. Gordon continues by saying that Hugo
Chávez is doing several things at once in terms of identity. He points out that “the
identity question preceded [Chávez] in a politically powerful way.” Gordon then
provided me with a history lesson. Describing French concern with the spread of
Anglophone countries, he described France’s penetration of the Americas on the
basis of language, considering themselves the highest culture of the Latin languages.
The French wanted to rule over the region of French, Spanish, and Portuguese
speakers. In their view, a French-‐controlled Latin American bloc could thwart the
tide of Anglophone world zones.
290. See CNN, “2009: Chávez Praises Obama, Hits U.S, ” video, September 24, 2009, http://edition.cnn.com/videos/world/2009/09/24/sot.chavez.un.imperialism.cnn. See also Chávez’s discussion on CNN with Larry King, viewable at “Larry King Live, 2009: Larry King Interviews Hugo,” YouTube video, 25:30, posted by CNN, http://panafricannews.blogspot.ca/2009/09/cnn-‐interview with-‐venezuelan-‐president.html. 291. Lewis Gordon, interview by the author, January 19, 2014. Gordon is currently a professor of Africana Philosophy in the African American Studies Department at the University of Connecticut.
169
However, Simon Bolivar had other ideas. According to Gordon, Bolivar’s
discourse comes with what Gordon called a “heavy, heavy” amount of racism,
although he was trying to be progressive. Gordon continues: “Mixture is often
celebrated, as long as it is not with Black. So a big source of anxiety was the
mulatto.” The “mestizo” has a different connotation being a European mixture with
Indigenous peoples. “This has led to the presupposition of erasure in Latin America,”
says Gordon. “Now,” he continues, “you cannot divorce race from gender because
servitude or identity status was inherited from the mother.” In Latin America, there
is a saying that “My grandmother was Black.” Gordon says that it sounds
progressive, but all that really means is that White males had access to Black
females. He quickly adds, “Black males were often used in wars in Latin America.
They were often promised their freedom, but the wars were so bloody that most of
the Black men died. This resulted in a radical decline of the numbers of Black males.
This facilitated the erasure of Blackness in Latin America.” Eventually, Black
solidarity and resistance groups began to gain ground in Argentina, Brazil, and
elsewhere in Latin America. The tricky question, then, was how does one deal with
Black recognition. So, Gordon finds that “if you look at any class issue in the Latin
American setting, because Blackness was tied to slavery and servitude, the class
issue is a race issue.” He asserts that although Castro is not Black, he formulated the
fundamentality of Black Cubans.292
292. When Castro was challenged by the United States for sending Cuban troops into southern Africa to fight apartheid and the South African military, he responded, “African blood runs freely through my veins.” See Fidel Castro, “Fidel Castro: “We shall defend Angola and Africa!” The Militant 78, no. 45, last updated December 15, 2014, http://www.themilitant.com/2014/7845/784549.html.
170
This allowed the United States to then frame anti-‐Castro politics by White
Cubans.
Gordon also gives the example of Puerto Rico. He acknowledges that there is
a stronger identification with Blackness in Puerto Rico, even though their skin might
be light. “Even the Whitest-‐looking Puerto Rican is located within Black politics,” he
says. “In the Latin American context, if you are going to present yourself in a
revolutionary way,” if you are going to challenge the system, then “raising the
question of Blackness” is the issue that hits the strongest chord for Gordon.
According to Gordon, empowering two groups challenges the system: Indigenous
and Black. Instead of stressing his Whiteness or his Indian-‐ness, Gordon points out
that Chávez stressed his Blackness. This, according to Gordon, aligned Chávez with a
type of liberation politics presupposing a bottom-‐up movement. It is undisputed
that Black people are at the bottom in Latin America, Gordon continues.
It is powerful that a national leader acknowledges his Black identity. At the
time of Chávez’s emergence, many Black movements had begun to assert
themselves. Yet while direct action was in defense of small land holdings that were
being taken over by affluent White farmers, South American violence reported in the
United States failed to reveal such underlying causes. Gordon argues that “the White
farmers wanted access to Black land.”293 He continued that their powerful cartels
are doing the business of “ethnic cleansing of the land” and that much of what is
presented by the U.S. media as drug wars is really the racial politics of land tenure.
293. Gordon, interview.
171
In bringing out the racial dimensions of power and politics, Chávez understood the
critical role of identity in a way that eludes most people.
While most people look at identity as a way of being in your body, Gordon
recognizes that identity is also a social relationship. Chávez was a political leader.
Gordon asserts, “What he was really announcing was a form of relationship with the
Global South.” Gordon believes that Chávez was asserting that he was a part of a
geo-‐political group: Chávez offered heating oil to low-‐income people in the United
States; 294 to Gordon, there is no issue that has more moral consideration in the
United States than the racial issues. Gordon continues, “No one thinks of the U.S. on
gender; but when you say race, the only other country you can think of is apartheid
South Africa. He is doing exactly what Castro did when Castro stayed at the Theresa
Hotel in Harlem when he first came to the U.S. for the United Nations General
Assembly.” By raising this, Gordon asserts that Chávez sets up his narrative around
race. This, to Gordon, makes Chávez similar to Steve Biko who raised the Black
Consciousness issue in apartheid South Africa.
Further, according to Gordon, Chávez brings out of the closet the notion of
“illicit appearance.” Chávez was fighting this notion. His articulation of his Blackness
is important. The hugely predominant White identity of Latin American television
and newspapers can remind you of Sweden! In contrast, Chávez talks about his lips
and his hair. He attacks the presupposition that if you are Black, you should not
appear. Chávez asserted the legitimacy of being Black and also of being a part of the
State. He eliminates any notion of deference to others and establishes the locality of 294. Tim Padgett, “Why Can’t Big Oil Match Hugo Chávez?” Time, January 7, 2009, http://content.time.com/time/business/ article/0,8599,1870219,00.html.
172
Blackness inside Venezuela as also representative of the State. This means that
Black people can assert themselves politically. This posed a threat, not only to the
United States, but also to the established way of doing business inside Venezuela.
Chávez subscribed to the notion of Mulatinidad that asserts that there is a strong
Black presence within the genetic pool of Latin America.
It took a special kind of courage to touch the taboo of racial identity, but
Chávez did that in his public discourse and also in state policy. Ciccariello-‐Maher
would agree with Gordon that Chávez was unique. He says, “Many Chavistas don’t
want to talk about race.” Ciccariello-‐Maher mentions that after the failed 2002
anti-‐Chávez coup attempt, there was a shift toward talking about race because “no
matter what he thought he was, he was seen as Black by the opposition”295 who
called Chávez derogatory names like “monkey” and “gorilla.”
Indeed, Marcano and Tyszka mention several times that Chávez was called
“ugly” in elementary and high school. We have seen that the standard of beauty in
Latin America and in Venezuela and everywhere else European colonialism has
visited, is set by a European ideal. Of course, Chávez was far from that. He spoke
openly of his thick lips and his curly hair. He had managed to take something for
which he was not supposed to have pride and turn it into an asset.
Askia Muhammad, Senior Editor at The Final Call Newspaper, a publication
founded by Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, agrees. Muhammad believes that
Chávez successfully used his African heritage as a bludgeon against those who
would denigrate him for it. Muhammad states that while for some it is easy to “run
295. George Ciccariello-‐Maher, interview by the author, February 6, 2014.
173
away” from their African heritage, Chávez “called out” his African heritage and was
proud of it. He concludes that Chávez is even more admirable because he “used it as
a bludgeon against those who would use it against him.”296 In a 2005 interview with
journalist Amy Goodman, Chávez openly connected hateful opposition to him, to his
African physical features: “As a matter of fact, we have several motherlands and one
of the greatest motherlands of all is no doubt, Africa. We love Africa.” He goes on to
say, “Hate against me has a lot to do with racism. Because of my big mouth, because
of my curly hair. And I’m so proud to have this mouth and this hair, because it’s
African.”297
Hugo Chávez gained the attention of hardened African-‐centered community
leaders in the United States like members of the Black Panther Party. Larry Pinkney,
a founding member, says that the Panthers were steeped in political education. He
says that Fanon, Nkrumah, Mao Tse Tung, and Marx were all required reading.
According to Pinkney, Chávez was just an ordinary person who adhered to principle
and “never forgot where he came from.”298 Pinkney adds, “ ‘To serve the people body
and soul’ was a saying of the Black Panthers, but Hugo Chávez embodied that: he
served the people body and soul.”299 Chávez made the point of his African-‐descent
296. Askia Muhammad, interview by the author, January 17, 2014. 297. See Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to the United States, “Afro-‐Venezuelans and the Struggle Against Racism,” venezuelanalysis.com, April 29, 2011, http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/6159. For an audiovisual excerpt from that interview, see “This Mouth, This Hair,” YouTube video, 1:15, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqCgiv6QBeQ, posted by Cynthia McKinney, October 6, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqCgiv6QBeQ. 298. Larry Pinkney, interview by the author, January 26, 2014. 299. Ibid.
174
clearly. “He was reaching out to African people throughout South America and the
Caribbean.
That took boldness, he was audacious,”300 Pinkney said. He added, “That’s
why he was so despised by the United States under both Bush and Obama.”301
Pinkney points out that Chávez was a man of action. He says that the Black Panthers
would say, “Talk is cheap, but action is supreme.”302 Pinkney recalls Chávez’s bold
actions: “He nationalized the oil company in Venezuela and wanted the people to
benefit from their oil. Of course this is totally contrary to what the United States
wanted. Chávez increased the literacy and health care for the people of Venezuela
which included the Black people in Venezuela.”303 Pinkney points out that the
policies and the programs of the Bolivarian Revolution were the same objectives
that aroused the action of the members of the Black Panther Party.
Research participant, Donald Smith speaks directly to the courage that
Chávez displayed by remaining true to his course. He interjects that alerting people
to critical and terribly important information of the type that Chávez did, basically,
that the people are very powerful, and of the tyranny of those who control wealth
and power, is “personally risky.”304 Smith says that when “the economic giants—the
United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia—recognized that Chávez and Qaddafi
were working together, they recognized that those two people must be destroyed
300. Ibid. 301. Ibid. 302. Ibid. 303. Ibid. 304. Donald Smith, interview.
175
and that others like them must be destroyed.”305 He says that it took a great deal of
courage for these leaders to do what they did recognizing that they would be
targets.
Finally, Asante mentioned Chávez’s relationship with Haiti and the role that
Haiti played in the liberation of the South American Continent, including Bolivar,
and the Bolivarian project. He explains, “When Bolivar was running out of arms
during his fight against the Spanish, it was the Haitian government that supplied him
with soldiers and with guns. Chávez understood all of those historical
connections.”306 Asante concludes: “The Revolution is not complete in Venezuela,
not in Latin America, not in the Western Hemisphere.”307
Hugo Chávez: Firm Believer in the Struggle for Sovereignty
James Early, one of my participants who personally knew Chávez, concludes
that Chávez was preparing Latin America to confront neoliberal philosophy. 308He
believes that Latin America is holding its own. He says that it is the most dynamic
part of the world. It is the place for searching for alternatives. Early feels that these
alternatives and Chávez’s practical institutional structures laid the ground for an
integration and interdependence of regions, like Africa and South America, vis-‐a-‐vis
the West.
Chávez believed that sovereignty and independence started with the
individual. Asante also believes that Chávez modeled the behavior that he expected
of others. Asante says, “He led by showing the people what they could do. He led by 305. Ibid. 306. Asante, interview. 307. Ibid. 308. Early, interview.
176
showing that regeneration was possible. He tried to build a new civil servant class.
Civil Servants began to see themselves as owners of the government.”309 Asante also
said that he believed that Chávez was an honest man and would be the first person
to admit that he made some mistakes.
Chávez also sought institutional change and sovereignty, especially within
the Venezuelan military and its oil sector. According to Asante, Chávez was also
trying to lead an institutional regeneration. He believes that Chávez understood that
the entrenched bureaucrats either had to be transformed or removed. Asante also
suggested that Chávez was a real optimist because he believed that he could have
some concrete institutional regeneration inside an institution whose members “had
been poisoned by the capitalist class.” Asante adds “the cleaning out of the oil sector
was necessary to get control of the politics of that sector for the country.”310
Chávez also sought to build an independent and sovereign Venezuela and
implemented agricultural, food, and land reform policies toward that end. The goal
was food sovereignty for Venezuela. Despite criticism for dismantling Venezuela’s
latifundios, Chávez persisted with his vision of sustainable agriculture, enshrined in
the Bolivarian Constitution. Just three months after the death of Chávez, the United
Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) recognized Venezuela for its
progress on eliminating hunger. In its June 2013 press release, “Progress is proof
that hunger can be eliminated,” the FAO praised Venezuela for its early attainment
of both the “Millennium Development Goal One (to halve the proportion of hungry
309. Asante, interview. 310. Ibid.
177
people by 2015)” and the “World Food Summit goal of halving the absolute number
of hungry people by 2015.”311
Ciccariello-‐Maher believes that there was method to Chávez’s Bolivarian
mission and to the people’s direct and participatory democratic practices. He
explains that the communes “are both political and economic; they are cooperatives
and state-‐run enterprises; the community council will determine who will work,
how much they will make, and what they will produce.”312 Ciccariello-‐Maher sees
this as both a permanent and defensive strategy: “If the government turns to the
right, then the popular movement will have some basis to resist this as a leverage
point.”313 Jeanette Charles314 agrees and believes that the appeal of the communes,
called Kumbés after Venezuela’s historical maroon cities, stems from the fact that it
is autochthonous. Charles says that the Kumbé is also a space of organizing and
spiritual resistance.
Thus, within the Bolivarian process, Chávez ensured that there was space for
independence and sovereignty, from the level of the individual to that of the region.
Despite being attacked, Chávez continued on his path, creating new organizations,
reaching out around the world and working on his twin projects of Latin American
and Caribbean integration and African integration. These organizations were
designed to help small countries protect their sovereignty and their right of
self-‐determination when under attack from the neoliberal policies of the United 311. Food and Agricultural Organization, “Progress Is Proof That Hunger Can Be Eliminated,” FAO, June 16, 2013, http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/ 178065/icode/. 312. Ciccariello-‐Maher, interview. 313. Ibid. 314. Jeanette Charles, interview by author, March 25, 2014.
178
States and the Washington Consensus. Pinkney concluded from his own experiences
that the struggle for end values and against domination requires resilience “from
Rosa Parks to Rosa Luxembourg.”315 Pinkney asserts that “Hugo Chávez
remembered that the struggle—across the board—is a struggle of resilience.”316
Pinkney says that Chávez understood that “Revolution is not an overnight affair, it’s
an ongoing process.”317 Indeed, Chávez had insisted that he was able to maintain his
resilience because of his well-‐developed consciousness. He told Guevara that a
well-‐developed consciousness, even in the hardest of times, allows no negativity.318
Hugo Chávez: Goal-‐Oriented, Confident, and Loyal
Hugo Chávez set goals for himself. Marcano and Tyszka write that he had said
that one day he was going to be somebody in Venezuela. It is clear from his
accomplishments that Hugo Chávez dreamed big dreams. It is also clear that he set
goals and he accomplished many of them. Asante says that Chávez was an “organic
leader”—at one with the people. Asante also believes that Chávez was a
“breakthrough leader” who got things done. By organic leader, Asante means
someone who was not above the people, but who was one of the people. Asante
asserts that it was “the way that Chávez identified with the masses of people that
gave him the legitimacy to do what he wanted to do.”319 He continues that Chávez
inspired a response on the part of the masses to neoliberalism. It was Chávez’s view,
according to Asante, that the objective of neoliberalism was to moot the ability of
315. Pinkney, interview. 316. Ibid. 317. Ibid. 318. Guevara, Chávez, Venezuela, 29. 319. Asante, interview.
179
the masses to rise against the capitalist class. Therefore, the masses of his people
would always be poor; “so he wanted to inspire a response to that.”320
Asante continues, “Chávez understood that the aim of social democracy, as it
had been interpreted, was to prevent cultural transformation from occurring
because it co-‐opted the potentiality of people from having a radical politicization of
their society.” Asante emphasizes the “breakthrough” nature of Chávez’s leadership:
“Breakthrough because he decided to take on the entrenched Eurocentric and
European-‐dominated capitalist class in Venezuela. They had the money, the system,
the institution, even though they are in the minority. Chávez took them on. This was
inspirational for Black people and oppressed people all over the world.”321
Ciccariello-‐Maher also adds in this same vein, that Chávez was like a
spearhead as well as a unifying figure. Chávez could go inside the state bureaucracy
and make things happen for the people and the social movements. “What Chávez did
was to unify and draw together” this energy. Ciccariello-‐Maher continues, “And
within the State apparatus, an enemy apparatus, he was able to break through
bureaucracy in a lot of ways and was able to help movements.”322
Hugo Chávez: Maintaining Historical Connectedness for Nation-‐Building
It is well known that Chávez rooted his discourse in Simon Bolivar, even
naming his Revolution after him. In an interview with Aleida Guevara,323 Chávez
says that he was surprised to learn that Bolivar had been exiled from Venezuela.
And who did that? Chávez had a ready answer: “The Venezuelan oligarchy… That 320. Ibid. 321. Ibid. 322. Ciccariello-‐Maher, interview. 323. Guevara, Chávez, Venezuela, 55.
180
same oligarchy murdered Marshal Sucre when he was only twenty-‐five years old.
They expelled Bolivar’s wife, Manuela Saenz. They expelled Simon Rodriguez and all
other Bolivarians and made themselves lords of the land.”324 Chávez knew who he
was and that made it easier for him to connect the historical dots of who
Venezuelans really were. In an interview with Guevara, Chávez said that he was a
mixture of Indigenous and African on his father’s side and that he was very proud of
his roots. He said that the “Indigenous means being part of the deepest and most
authentic roots of our people and our land.”325 And he said that the mix works very
well. Like in Cuba. And he gave the example of a very beautiful Black Cuban girl to
whom he was to give an award. He mentioned her beauty to her and she responded,
“You Venezuelans and we Cubans are the perfect blend: Indigenous, African, and a
touch of White as well.”326 In this interview with Guevara, Chávez said that he was
proud of his roots.
According to Asante, Chávez inspired people to stand up for the truth. When
he was kidnapped in the 2002 coup attempt, the people believed in him almost
personally. They understood that the love for his people was a great love. And I
think it goes back to his heritage, his identity. His great-‐grandmother was a
Mandingo woman. If you look at the totality of this man, his African-‐ness, part
African, part Indigenous, but he understood that he was a part of the flowering
world that was to be. By embracing his identity, he embraced all of the people,
including those who had been denying their own African identity.
324. Ibid., 9. 325. Ibid., 14. 326. Ibid.
181
Reflecting on the birth of the country, Chávez said that the people became an
army and they went to war for freedom. He was confident that Venezuelans could do
that again. Asante affirms tone aspect of Chávez’s leadership was that he was
“historically conscious.” This is why he attached his movement to Simon Bolivar.
Bolivar was the great, mass revolutionary leader to this part of the Americas. Asante
believes that it was the organic nature of Chávez’s leadership that made the people
feel a part of their own government. Asante asks, “Can you imagine what would
happen in the United States of America if we went block by block and told the
people, ‘Look, the government belongs to you and we are going to struggle for
transformation of society because the government belongs to you!’ ”327
My participant, Venezuela Woman #2, gives a little history of Venezuela. She
says that the children of the Second World War II immigrants are the current
Opposition in Venezuela. She works in the Venezuela Embassy during election time
and said she has never seen so many White Venezuelans in Venezuela as she sees in
the United States: “the way they behave, the way they talk, the color of their skin,
there is no difference between them and any White upper class Anglo-‐American.”328
She continues, “They are second and third and fourth generation Europeans—
Italians, Portuguese, Spaniards, French, Eastern Europeans, and German comprise
the hard-‐core Venezuelan opposition. They created their own notion of Venezuela,
the Venezuela of their own creation is not the Venezuela of the masses. We are a
mixed country and the people who live in the United States are not representative of
327. Asante, interview. 328. Venezuelan Woman #2, interview by author, March 31, 2014.
182
the entire country.”329 She adds that Chávez changed the language to reflect the
many cultures of Venezuela and not just one. She says that Chávez changed the
language away from the very racist policy of the mestizaje which denied the African
part of Venezuelan culture. “The three cultures are undeniable: African, European,
Indian. Chávez was able to recognize that mestizaje was not just Indian and
European, but was also African. He said, ‘Mother Africa’ and changed the racist
language. He made a presence. He took a stand to change the language and told the
people, ‘Unless you are a part of the 20% you are Indian, African, and European.’”330
She further asserts that the racism against President Chávez was against his
phenotype; “he looked Venezuelan; they were prejudiced against his non-‐European
phenotype. And they felt that he did not belong in politics because he did not have a
European phenotype. They saw him as an inferior. They feel the same way about
Maduro” and the others in the current government. Moreover, the opposition don’t
see themselves as ‘Caribbean’ because the Caribbean is African and that is another
part of their racist attitude.”331
By making these changes from the racist attitudes of the past and by
embracing the revolutionary spirit of the past, Chávez was able to create a
Venezuela that was for all Venezuelans. Venezuelan Woman #2 says that she has
never seen the presence of Afro-‐Venezuelans like she has seen under Chávez and
Maduro. “Afro-‐Venezuelans have become more present. Governors in Venezuela are
Afro-‐descendant. People are in official posts as Afro-‐Descendants. To see
329. Ibid. 330. Ibid. 331. Ibid.
183
Afro-‐descendants in Venezuelan diplomacy was unlikely before Chávez. They are
present in government and in the National Assembly. Afro-‐descendants were
invisible, they didn’t exist before Chávez.”332 Noting that Elias Jaua, Chávez’s Foreign
Minister, was also Afro-‐Venezuelan, Venezuelan Woman #2 drew attention to
images of several current Afro-‐descendant political leaders (Figures 6.1 & 6.2).
Figure 5.1. Aristóbulo Istúriz Almeida, Governor, State of Anzoátegui. He was formerly Minister of Education in Chávez’s cabinet. Photo by Lucino Bracci. Retrieved and adapted from https://www.flickr.com/photos/lubrio/ 2375776015/in/photolist-‐5Exrre-‐9rFBMB-‐4BWtrr-‐7xPj41. Used under Creative Commons Attribution-‐NonCommercial-‐ShareAlike 2.0 License.
Figure 5.2. Chávez’s Vice-‐President, Elias Jaua, and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. Photo by Premier.gov.ru. Retrieved from http://premier.gov.ru/events/ news/17334/photolents.html Used under Creative Common 3.0 Attribution License.
332. Ibid.
184
James Early notes that Chávez’s grasp and love of history informed his own
personal development and also informed his leadership. He remembers Chávez as
someone who did a lot of reading and who was “very eclectic.” He also recalls that
Chávez cited to him Julius Nyerere’s idea that the Non-‐Aligned Movement needed its
own satellites for communication.
Asante points out the historical connectedness of Chávez with Fidel Castro.
He says, “He was a brilliant man” and a lightning rod for change in Latin America.
Asante points out Chávez’s leadership even in countries nominally in opposition to
Chávez. He points out that people were inspired by Chávez in Colombia, even though
Colombia’s President was on the “other side.” Asante concluded, “People gained
their courage on the back of Hugo Chávez just as Chávez had gained his courage on
the back of Fidel Castro.”
Toward the end of his interview with Guevara, Chávez had this to say: “We
have to finish burying what has to die and give birth to what has to be born. We are
still a long way from this.”333
Hugo Chávez: Collective Work and Cooperative Economics
Hugo Chávez took the Revolution in Venezuela to the verge of the creation of
free, independent, self-‐reliant maroon societies. Now, according to Charles and
Ciccariello-‐Maher, the Revolution is deepening and headed in that direction. Maroon
societies existed throughout the Caribbean archipelago and were the result of
successful slave revolts, where Africans fled enslavement by running to the hills.
There, they created self-‐sustaining societies that became known as Maroon towns.
333. Guevara, Chávez, Venezuela, 109.
185
Maroons also existed in the United States and often mixed with Native Americans
and remained free.334
The Kumbé communes were not the only way in which Chávez instituted and
practiced collective work and cooperative economics. Some of the initiatives today,
like the alternative currency, the sucre, used for intra-‐regional trade, is another
example of such economics. I believe that there are two potent examples of ongoing
institutions that illustrate Chávez’s collective and cooperative spirit: Comunidad de
Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribeños (CELAC), mentioned earlier, and PetroCaribe.
Just this year, 2014, CELAC accomplished a milestone in that every country in the
region, whether they could be considered a friend of the Bolivarian Republic of
Venezuela or not, participated in the CELAC Summit held in January in Havana,
Cuba. The first Summit was held in Venezuela. Chávez proclaimed that a united Latin
America, from Mexico to Antarctica, was Bolivar’s dream and Latin Americans today
were making that dream come true.
PetroCaribe, an oil program for the Caribbean region, will be discussed in the
sixth chapter. However, it too is an example of the collective economics that guided
Chávez’s leadership. Graciela Chailloux Laffita, Ph.D. is a professor at the University
of Havana in Cuba and is the co-‐author of Subjects or Citizens: British Caribbean
Workers in Cuba: 1900–1960.335 She just happened to be giving a lecture at Boston
University during the research for this dissertation, and so I joined in by Skype.
334. See Richard Price, ed., Maroon Societies: Rebel Slave Communities in the Americas, 2nd ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979). 335. Robert Whitney and Graciela Chailloux Laffita, Subjects or Citizens: British Caribbean Workers in Cuba: 1900–1960 (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2013).
186
Chailloux suggested that while European Venezuelans pulled away from a Caribbean
identity, Cuba and Venezuela did the opposite. She added that once she learned that
Chávez had read Black Jacobins by C.L.R. James, she published a formal translation of
that book in Spanish. In that translation, Chailloux writes that an organization like
PetroCaribe would be unthinkable if Europeans had been allowed to write both the
history and the present of Latin America. Chailloux commented as follows in her
translation of James’s monumental book, The Black Jacobins, (which I have discussed
in the second chapter):
When history is written from the centers of power, with the aim of defending the superiority of western civilization, the only way a politically and ideologically radical group can be only acknowledged as legitimate is within the framework of a process like the French Revolution. The only way to allow for the existence of Jacobins in the Caribbean, especially if they are Black, is by taking the audacious step of flatly rejecting the idea that there are higher and lower models of civilization. Otherwise, when history sees the Third World (making up no less than three-‐quarters of humanity) through the eyes of the centers of power, it explains that we are an odd, strange, anomalous offshoot of Western civilization, and that we will remain so until we reach the levels of civilization that they have achieved at our expense. From this perspective, then, the existence of, for example, Petrocaribe is completely unthinkable and totally improbable.336
Conclusion on Hugo Chávez’s Leadership
It should be clear from the foregoing discussion that Hugo Chávez was not
only an African-‐centered, political leader, according to Hotep and Assensoh, but that
he was also a Parrhesiastes and Transformational Leader, according to the theories
of Foucault and Burns. As we shall see later, it is my assessment that these
leadership attributes combined to make him by far the most important
African-‐descendant political leader of a generation. He produced not only pride in 336. Graciela Chailloux, “The Black Jacobins, Teachers of Revolution,” Caminos 48, (2008), http://www.walterlippmann.com/docs2352.html.
187
other African descendants, but also racked up a solid list of policy accomplishments
that moved the people of Venezuela forward. Hugo Chávez sits among the pantheon
of African leaders, whose names he revered, who tried to arrest the “intolerable
humiliations”337 that go along with the dehumanizing neoliberal development that
occurs at the expense of people of color, whether they are in the Global South or in
the belly of the Washington Consensus.
337. Philomena Essed, “Intolerable Humiliations,” in Racism Postcolonialism Europe eds. Graham Huggan and Ian Law, (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2009), 131–147.
188
Hugo Chávez—Afro-‐Descendiente and Proud!
In this chapter, I intend to discuss specific references to Africa, African
descent, or a more inclusive (in other words, not Eurocentric) worldview in the
Chávez discourse. This will also include instances of African pride that can be
pinpointed by his words or policies that resulted in the uplift of the Afro-‐Venezuelan
people. Before 2005, race was a factor in the discourse of Hugo Chávez and against
him. In his interview with the daughter of Ché Guevara, Aleida, Chávez
acknowledges that by the time he was twenty-‐one years of age, he had acquired “a
certain level of consciousness.”338 He speaks incredulously of the fact that Simon
Bolivar was expelled from Venezuela and says that the oligarchy that did that to
Bolivar is the same being opposed by the Bolivarian Revolution today. In that
conversation, he also acknowledges that he soon came to realize that the
Venezuelan military was being used against its own people who were protesting the
structural adjustment policies of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Chávez acknowledges that it was the people’s reaction to neoliberalism that
allowed him to have an opening and an opportunity. At a January 2003 press
conference in Porto Alegre, Brazil, at the World Social Forum, Chávez said: “The last
time that Venezuela signed a package with the IMF, there was a popular uprising
when thousands died (The Caracazo). After that, we had two military uprisings. The
popular and military uprising curbed the neoliberal program and cleared an
alternative path, the one we are taking now.”339 Further, Chávez reflected on
temporal events in 1989 and 1991. He noted that 1989, not only was the year of the 338. Guevara, Chávez, Venezuela, 9. 339. Chávez, Fascist Coup, 289.
189
Caracazo, it was also the year that the Berlin Wall fell. 1991 was also the year that
the Soviet Union fell. He observed that after these events, neoliberalism raised its
flag and proclaimed global victory. However, in Venezuela, at that very moment,
neoliberalism was dying. He said that the people took to the streets in a rebellion
that continues to this day.
Chávez said that during the Caracazo, he was down with the measles and was
not in the streets with his fellow military officers. But he learned that soldiers fired
upon unarmed people. And he remembered what Bolivar said: “The soldier who
ever turns his weapon against his own people must be damned.”340 According to
Chávez, Venezuela was under Bolivar’s curse until the February 4, 1992 coup
attempt, led by Chávez, which allowed the Venezuelan military to exorcise its sins
committed during the Caracazo. According to Chávez, his Presidency was actually
the culmination of the historical factors that led to the awakening of the people.
This, he said was the new Venezuela, the Venezuela of the Bolivarian Revolution.
When he emerged from prison and a journalist asked him where was he going next,
he remembers that his response was two words: “To power!”341 Chávez says that he
resigned from the military and went into politics.
Hugo Chávez’s Identity Reflected in His Leadership
Several participants in the interviews spoke of how Hugo Chávez was an avid
reader. That is reflected in his discourse. In his speeches, Chávez quoted those
whom he had read. Chávez, too, talked about his love of reading and the works that
he read. He also learned from his reading. For example, he told Guevara that he read 340. Chávez, Fascist Coup, 303. 341. As told to Guevara in Chávez, 12.
190
history books that told him how the Indigenous people of the Americas were
slaughtered. He said to Guevara, “They slaughtered us.”342 The “us” used by Chávez
is very indicative of him speaking from the non-‐European identity: the Other, the
Subaltern, the Un. Chávez continues, “I feel the Caribbean stirring within me,
because I am Indian, mixed with African, with a touch of White thrown in.”343
Chávez told Guevara a story that seems reminiscent of the ones he loved to
tell. It featured an old Black woman whom Chávez characterized as strong. He said
that the oligarchs, with help from their international friends, were trying to produce
collapse in the country. They had sabotaged the oil refineries, thrown away millions
of liters of milk, and slaughtered cows so that there would be no food. He told
Guevara of the international solidarity shown to Venezuela by Cuba and Brazil. And
so, it was during this time that he thought he would take a look at how things were
going up in the hills of Caracas. While he was there, he was grabbed by this woman
and marched to her home where they were cooking plantain, rice, and potatoes. She
told him that she had used the wood from her chairs for firewood and that the fire
that he saw was because she was burning the legs from her bed. And then she told
him, taking him by the lapels, “We’ll burn the furniture, the roof, and we’ll even
break down the doors and cook with them, but don’t you dare give in, Chávez.”344
And like Cabral, Chávez believed that one of the most potent weapons they had in
their peaceful, but armed revolution, was their ideology and consciousness.
342. Guevara, Chávez, Venezuela, 15. 343. Ibid. 344. Ibid., 17.
191
Chávez received many of his ideas from his voracious reading. Chávez
paraphrased President John F. Kennedy in a speech at an Urban Land Titling
ceremony in 2003: he asked, “Do Venezuelans want peace? Yes, we do want peace,
but we don’t want the peace of the graves; we don’t want the peace of slaves.”345
Chávez also quoted Kennedy when asked about the nature of his revolution;
Kennedy supplied the answer: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible
make violent revolution inevitable.” Chávez was clear that the Bolivarian Revolution
would be peaceful, but armed.
Participant Graciela Chailloux told me that she was sure that Chávez was
familiar with Black authors of the Caribbean and that his acknowledgement of his
African ancestry was an important milestone for Afro-‐Latinos and the Caribbean.
Chávez also acknowledged that during his time in the military academy, he
was an avid reader. It was while he was in the academy that he conceived the
Bolivarian Army for the Liberation of the Venezuelan People and deepened his
consciousness as well as that of his fellow military cadets and officers. He says that
he recalled those readings while he was in prison and that those readings allowed
him to feel free despite being confined to a very small cell. Chávez said in his
interview with Guevara that he used the two years and two months of imprisonment
after his unsuccessful coup attempt, to do a good deal of reading. He said that he was
able to strengthen both his soul and his convictions.
345. Chávez, Fascist Coup, 124. In 1963, President Kennedy’s words were, “What kind of peace do we seek? Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave.” President John F. Kennedy, “1963 Commencement,” speech at American University, June 10, 1963, http://www1.american.edu/media/speeches/Kennedy.htm.
192
Chávez recognized that the Bolivarian Revolution had touched people as far
away as Asia. In 2003, in a nationally broadcast speech to the people of Venezuela,
Chávez said: “Millions, millions upon millions of human beings in this Continent, in
Africa, in Asia, and many other places, identify with Venezuela’s voice. Venezuela is
now a voice in the whole world, on the whole planet.”346 Chávez realized that the
vast population of the world outside Europe resonated with his ideas and with the
Venezuelan experience. And, yet, at the same time, he realized that the
circumstances in Venezuela were unique. When comparing the people of Chile when
Allende was overthrown to the people of Venezuela when the attempted coup
against him was thwarted, he noted that the people of Chile did not take to the
streets while the people of Venezuela did.
Chávez also seized every opportunity to congratulate a crowd when he was
outside of Venezuela that looked like the world. He would acknowledge the faces of
the world in his audience: Black and White faces; Indigenous and mestizo faces; men
and women; the young and the still young at heart. This inclusiveness in his
discourse indicated, also, an easily discernible level of comfort.
Chávez’s Bolivarian Revolution had solid results for Afro-‐Venezuelans. In a
compilation of achievements up to 2012, the Bolivarian Government of Venezuela
boasts eleven improvements for Afro-‐Venezuelans. It is interesting to note that most
of these targeted actions began in 2005 and this is also when it is reported that
Chávez publicly acknowledged his own African roots. My participant, Venezuelan
Man #1, agrees that there was a burst of activity in recognizing Afro-‐descendants
346. Chávez, Fascist Coup, 205.
193
and that at first Chávez kept this aspect of his identity at a distance. In fact,
Venezuelan Woman #3 asserts that Chávez really was Indigenous and had no
African roots and actually used race and his purported racial identity to divide the
country. She said, “Chávez isn’t considered a Black person in Venezuela by
Venezuelans. He is not considered a person of African ancestry. But Venezuelans,
when you ask them, they would say ‘He has Indigenous roots.’ Those are the
features of the Native Venezuelans, which of course, we call Indians.” She believes
that Chávez used his considerable charisma to fuel racial division and polarization in
the country.
The Bolivarian Government’s eleven cited accomplishments for
Afro-‐Venezuelans under Chávez were:
• The 1999 Constitution that declares Venezuela a multiethnic and
multicultural society with equality among cultures;
• A ninety-‐seven percent voter registration rate as a result of campaigns
since 2001 targeting the poor and marginalized;
• The 2003 creation of Missions that target poverty in Venezuela;
• The creation of a post in 2005 that handles Afro-‐Descendant Affairs
within the Ministry of Culture;
• The 2005 designation of a Vice Minister for African Affairs and the
opening of new embassies in Africa;
• The 2005 designation of May 10 as Afro-‐Venezuelan Day (celebrating José
Leonardo Chirinos and his armed rebellion against Spain in 1795) and the
month of May as Afro-‐Descendants Month;
194
• The 2005 creation of a Presidential Commission for the Prevention and
Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination in the Educational
System;
• The 2009 Education Law recognizing Afro-‐Descendants;
• The 2011 decision to include “Afro-‐Descendant” on the Venezuelan
Census;
• The 2011 Law Against Racial Discrimination;
• The decision to place the image of Pedro Camejo, known as Negro
Primero, on the new Venezuelan currency; and
• The 2012 Council for the Development of Afro-‐Descendant
Communities.347
Not mentioned by the Venezuelan government is the 2005 establishment of
an “Africa Chair” in the Bolivarian University System. The Venezuelan Embassy in
the United States also notes the Chávez interview during which he acknowledged his
mouth and hair, saying that he is proud to have these features because they are
African. In so doing, Chávez became the very first Venezuelan President to
acknowledge his Africanness. The Embassy also touts its relationship with the
Caribbean countries through PetroCaribe, which helps Caribbean countries import
Venezuelan oil with favorable financing. I would add Venezuela’s successful
launching of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) as
347. Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to the U.S., “The Struggles and Achievements of Afro-‐Venezuelans, May 1, 2012, http://venezuela-‐us.org/live/wp-‐content/uploads/2009/08/05-‐10-‐2012-‐FS-‐Afro-‐Venezuelans1.pdf.
195
another very important example of this multilateral cooperation reflecting Chávez’s
idea that Latin Americans, Caribbeans, and Africans were all one people.
Speaking in 2003 at the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil, Chávez
told the story of a young child who had died; he and some fellow travelers went to
see the mother. He explained that the baby’s mother was a young Black Venezuelan
who, in tears, told him that the baby had died of hunger, but would be buried in a
cradle of gold because in Guyana gold is plentiful in the dust and sand. He compared
her plight to Venezuelan farmers and said that they live in “absolute poverty” while
a “sea of oil” lies underneath the soil. Chávez began the wind-‐down of his comments
in Brazil by saying that the transformation that will engulf all of Latin America does
not depend on one person, but instead would be the result of a collective awareness.
He said collective consciousness is the force above all that is responsible for social
transformations. I believe he could say that because he, himself, had become aware
of his own identity, his ideology, through consciousness and had transformed
himself as he sought to transform others.
The Role of Race in Latin America and Venezuela
As we know from Fanon, Azad, and others, there are multiple ways that the
colonized and dominated cope with their status. Denial of the attributes that
contribute to that status is one coping mechanism. Denial of African descent is not
unusual. My study participant, Jeanette Charles, noted, in my conversation with her,
that there is a revival of religion in Venezuela and that many people who have not
yet come to the realization of Africa being a part of their identity, practice African
religions. She told me, “There are a lot of people in Venezuela who do not consider
196
themselves Afro-‐descendant, but who actually are.” With their culture dislocated,
they become practitioners of Euromimesis—a fancy way of saying what Fanon
originally said, Black Skin, White Masks. They become White in every way except
phenotype. Plastic surgeries obliterate this genetic scar tissue of too much nose or
too much lips. European partners are chosen to lessen the pronouncement of these
features in successive generations.
As discussed in the second chapter, Fanon calls this phenomenon
“lactification.” The idea is that everything that is different from the European feature
is a mark of ugliness and unacceptability. Lactification is a manifestation of
self-‐contempt. And such psychologically destructive patterns of behavior are passed
down generation to generation. As Azad points out, the “Comprador Class” (that is,
that class of colonized people who are provided education and special privileges by
the colonizers and who knowingly or unknowingly collude in the oppression of the
colonized), are specifically trained to extend the reach and deepen the depths of
European domination outside of Europe. Anyone who is trained in this setting is
trained, then, to maintain this Eurocentrism and European domination. In essence,
the formal training under such a system is the training for a non-‐European to
become a member of the Comprador Class. So, how did Hugo Chávez escape the trap
of Euromimesis?
I believe that Chávez’s African pride or love of the Africanness in his
phenotype would have been a gradual development for Chávez. Venezuelan Man #1
agrees and suggests that the turning point for Chávez came after the failed United
States-‐backed 2002 coup attempt. He said that it was at that point the media came
197
out very heavily with the use of words like gorilla, monkey, darkie and it became
clear to Chávez who the Venezuelan political elite thought he was.348
Venezuelan Man #2 described in painstaking detail the horrors of being a
dark-‐skinned teenager in Venezuela before the rise of Chávez to power. He recalled
for me that he had the good fortune of attending a private school in Caracas where
the elite went. He attended a party, but not a single White girl would dance with
him. He says that it took him three years to figure it out, but that eventually, he
realized that this had been because of his dark skin color.
He went on to describe how endoracismo affects the Blacks: he says that they
want to marry Whites. They feel that they are improving themselves and the race
when they marry White. All of his siblings “married White.” Despite warnings from
his family, he married a Black woman to whom he is still very happily married and
now even his family adore her, he told me.
Indeed, Marcano and Tyszka write that Chávez’s second wife, Marisabel
Rodriguez, was the equivalent of what is now known in the political world as a
“trophy wife” and that Chávez’s political advisor used her a lot in his 1998
presidential campaign. In fact, according to Marcano and Tyskza, this advisor
decided to frontline Rodriguez in order to soften Chávez’s image and make him
more acceptable to the voters. This is exactly the kind of arrangement to which
Fanon refers to when he writes about “lactification.” Marcano and Tyska write:
348. Jesus Chucho Garcia dates these changes in Chávez’s identity from an Afro-‐descendiente meeting where, on January 11, 2004, Chávez declared his African heritage. See Jesus Chucho Garcia, “A Maroon President Called Hugo Chávez,” America Latina en Movimiento, March 15, 2013, http://alainet.org/active/62495&lang=es.
198
Marisabel is well educated, kind, attractive, and spontaneous. Her type of beauty was especially useful to the campaign because there is something about her that recalls the stereotype that so many people seem to adore: she is White, she has blue eyes, and in fact, she had even participated in a competition sponsored by Revlon to find the most beautiful face in Venezuela. At the side of the unpredictable, aggressive soldier, suddenly there was a real-‐life Barbie doll who even made sense when she talked.349
Rodriguez agrees that she played a very special role in the presidential
campaign of Chávez. According to Marcano and Tyszka, Marisabel said, “I was there
to lower my husband’s rejection rate in the polls, and to win over a segment of the
population that was totally unwilling [to support him.]”350 Shortly after Chávez won
the presidency, Rodriguez ran for and won a seat in the National Assembly. It was
Rodriguez who, in the midst of the 2002 anti-‐Chávez coup, confirmed on United
States television that Chávez had not resigned, but had, instead, been kidnapped.
Two years later, in 2004, Rodriguez and Chávez divorced. The popular press claimed
that Rodriguez felt “the feeling of hatred in Chávez’s world.”351 The New York Times
quotes Rodriguez as saying, at a Venezuela press conference, that she “could be
attacked at any time by these hordes he has on the street.”352
Chávez’s older brother, Adan, was his political inspiration. Adan, a physics
professor influenced him and encouraged him to run for President. But, before that,
Adan put Hugo in touch with the members of the Party for the Venezuelan 349. Marcano and Tyszka, Hugo Chávez, 17 (see second chap., n. 51). 350. Ibid., 237 quoting Sebastian de la Nuez, Marisabel, la historia te absolvera (Caracas: Editorial Exceso, 2002), 51. 351. Veronique de Miguel, “Hugo Chávez’s Women: The Ex Wives and Mistresses Who Loved Venezuela’s Ailing President,” Huffington Post Latino Voices, January 11, 2013, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/11/hugo-‐Chávezs-‐women-‐the-‐ex_n_2455974.html. 352. Simon Romero, “Venezuela’s President Scorned by Bitter Political Foe: His Ex-‐Wife,” New York Times, May 12, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/12/ world/americas/12venezuela.html?_r=0.
199
Revolution and former guerrilla members who were dissatisfied with the corruption
of both the military and political leaders. Chávez credited Adan with providing him
the background and political orientation to know his place in Venezuelan politics
and when it was the proper time to pursue it. Chávez was steeped in political theory
before he went to the military academy and that only accelerated in his studies
there. But while in the military, Hugo Chávez developed heroes who were
progressive generals in charge of countries (like Omar Torrijos of Panama and Juan
Velasco of Peru)353 and who were doing progressive things by asserting national
sovereignty. While in the military, he also had the opportunity to learn about United
States-‐backed alternatives to the populist, nationalist generals on September 11,
1993 when Salvador Allende was toppled by Augusto Pinochet. It is study
participant Wayne Madsen who reminds us that Chávez was prone to dislike United
States-‐backed military leaders and Organization of America States (OAS) operations
because their regimes created the context within which Indigenous people in
Guatemala were being massacred. In our interview, Madsen recalls that Chávez was
changed by that:
I recall that Chávez once said that he once participated in an Organization of American States peacekeeping operation in Guatemala. At the time he was a low-‐ranking Army officer, he may have been a Major. This would have been back in the ‘70s or early ‘80s. He said that he was supportive of his own government, which was corrupt, of course, until he witnessed how the Guatemalan Army, backed by the United States, treated the Indians and he counted himself amongst the Indigenous peoples of Latin and South America. He was appalled by that, and this is when he started to have his first doubts, because he witnessed this genocide.
353. Velasco served in Peru from 1968 to 1975 and Torrijos served in Panama from 1972 to 1981.
200
Chávez told Guevara about the process for choosing what was to be included
in the 1999 Bolivarian Constitution. He said that the gays came and asked for
same-‐sex marriage; the women came and asked for abortion; the Indigenous came
and asked for respect for their rights; Blacks came and “took over the Congress.”354
He said the children visited with the First Lady and asked for their rights, too. In the
end, the Constitution specifically addressed the cultural rights of all Venezuelans
and the right of the Indigenous to speak their native language.
Chapter VIII of the Venezuelan Constitution outlines the Rights of Native
People. In eight Articles, from Article 119 to Article 126 the Constitution recognizes
the existence of Indigenous communities and their right of recognition of their
practices, customs, religions, languages, habitat, and their original rights to the land.
Ciccariello-‐Maher points out that Afro-‐Venezuelan women pushed hard for a
pro-‐woman Constitution that recognized the value of women’s labor (Article 88), as
well as women’s sexual and reproductive rights (Article 76). Their push led to the
success of the women’s agenda in the Constitution, including wages for housework
Article 88). Blacks came, as Chávez notes, to press their case for inclusion in the
Constitution, but they walked away with nothing. When talking to James Early,
Chávez admitted that this was a mistake. And from the flurry of activities in the year
2005, it seemed that Chávez sought to correct that mistake with changes in the law
and ministerial appointments. Ciccariello-‐Maher notes that the Constitution is
obvious in its silence on Afro-‐Venezuelan rights. By contrast, he writes, the
Indigenous community got almost everything that they asked for. Ciccariello-‐Maher
354. Guevara, Chávez Venezuela, 34.
201
writes that Chucho Garcia, creator of the Afro-‐Venezuelan Network, believes that
Afro-‐Venezuelans who were in a position to push for recognition in the Constitution,
“just did not grasp the importance of Afro struggles when the time came.”355 I
believe that this is also a reflection of the only-‐nascent awareness at the time of
African heritage in Chávez’s own identity.
Clearly, something changed between 1999 and 2005 to increase Chávez’s
awareness of and appreciation for the African part of his identity. According to
Ciccariello-‐Maher, it was the failed anti-‐Chávez coup attempt that put Chávez’s
identity in stark relief—for European Venezuelans—and for him.
However, according to Venezuelan Man #1, Chávez could have and should
have gone even further. He says that the Durban World Conference Against Racism
provided a golden opportunity to put the plight of Afro-‐Descendants on the
Venezuelan center stage and that did not happen. Now, without Chávez, he says, the
possibilities arising from the United Nations upcoming Decade of Afro-‐Descendant
People (from 2015 to 2025) will suffer.
I believe that in 1999 Hugo Chávez just was not ready mentally to accept and
then champion the African part of his identity. He acknowledged that Blacks came to
Caracas to plead their case for inclusion in the Constitution and yet it did not
happen. The Durban World Conference Against Racism came and went without a
strong Chávez push. I would suggest that Chávez didn’t fully become “Black” until
after the 2002 coup attempt against him and its failure released a torrent of racist
vitriol against him. This was probably the period that presented Chávez with his
355. Ciccariello-‐Maher, We Created Chávez, 156.
202
own “disorienting dilemma.”356 The Chávez that we now know is the Chávez that
emerged from that moment.
Many of my study participants noted the racist nature of the opposition to
the Bolivarian state. In the highly racialized context of Chávez’s policies and the
assertion of his identity, Venezuelan Woman #1 says that Chávez had to endure
withering racist assaults in the media. Some of the cartoons appearing in
Venezuela’s elite press were described earlier. He could easily have dodged these
bullets by taking a different course. He demonstrated his belief in his struggle by
continuing to go out there, round after round, getting beaten and bruised for an idea
and an ideal, what Burns would call an end value. This participant characterized the
attacks on Chávez as a propaganda war and characterized the Opposition to the
government as “full of hate.” She freely mentioned the “component of racism” in
those attacks that makes her sad. She said that the part of the population that
support the government are described on FaceBook by the opposition Venezuelans
with all kinds of names: “ignorant, monkeys, gorillas, donkeys, and other ugly
words.” I pressed her for these other ugly words, as she put it, because I wanted to
see how those who perceived themselves as White characterized Hugo Chávez. She
continued as I asked and repeated the “ugly words” leaving the worst for last:
Hordas, which means hordes and niche which means “poor, ordinary, dirty,
mixed-‐race,” and more. I further pressed her on what she meant by “more.” I asked 356. Sociologist and educator Jack Mezirow theorized that transformative learning took place after reflection and crisis that were caused by an experience that did not fit in with an existing belief system. Transformative learning, according to the theory, takes place when one uses new interpretations of experiences to guide future behavior. See Jack Mezirow, Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning (San Francisco: Jossey-‐Bass, 1991).
203
her if niche equals “nigger,” her response using someone else’s Skype account was
“sort of.” I followed up with Venezuelan Woman #1 to ask her if niche is a word used
by poor, uneducated, darker-‐skinned Venezuelans to refer to themselves. She
responded: “niche’ is a term of disdain used by those who feel superior.” In a follow-‐
up message on FaceBook, she elaborated telling me even more insults that were
hurled regularly at Chávez and that continue with his successor, Maduro.
When I asked Venezuelan Woman #3 if she was familiar with the word, niche,
her response to me was “Of course, I’m Venezuelan, of course.” She continued, “ Yes.
Niche is related to black, poor, from the barrios. Hordas is hordes. Another
frecuent(sic) insult is chabestias, it’s a mix of chavistas and bestias (Beasts). Maduro
is often called Maburro. Burro means donkey. It’s 3 a.m. Some people are banging
pans in my neighborhood. This is an opposition neighborhood.”
Giordano describes the attitude of Venezuelans who are opposed to the
Bolivarian Revolution. He calls the opposition Venezuelans “Miami Venezuelans,”
who are like the “Miami Cubans” in that they believe that “the country” is composed
only of them and that “those people who are just a little more brown than us—who
are poorer than us, who don’t speak English—those people aren’t really people.”
Giordano adds, “It’s really easy to dislike these people.” Ciccariello-‐Maher says that
whatever Chávez considered himself to be, the opposition was clear that he was a
monkey, gorilla, beast, or other sub-‐human species and that he was one of the
“hordes” or qualified as a “niche.” This probably crystalized for the opposition
because for the first time in the history of Latin America, a coup was reversed by the
people—the very people who were hated by the opposition and for whom the ship
204
of state was never to turn. It probably crystalized for Chávez, too, who came to know
exactly what he was in the eyes of the opposition, the basis for which he was so very
much hated. In his conversation with Guevara, he acknowledged that the opposition
called him a “beast.”357
It is interesting, then, that in January 2003, Chávez quoted Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr. He said, “As Blacks, we must combine a strong spirit with a tender heart if
we are to move positively toward the goal of freedom and justice.” In introducing his
new Minister of Education, although he really did not have to do so, Chávez noted
that the Minister, Aristobulo Isturiz, is of African descent.358 In reading Chávez’s
entire speech, I believe it is clear that Chávez was proud to make the introduction
and the identification of Isturiz as an Afro-‐Venezuelan minister.359 Isturiz is now the
Governor of Anzuategui state, one of several prominent Venezuelan statesmen of
African descent.
In 2003, on his television show, Alo Presidente, Chávez attacked the
opposition because it had just accused Chávez of turning over the Venezuelan
state-‐owned oil company (PDVSA) to the Cubans. Their evidence? They saw
dark-‐skinned people in the building. The opposition accused Chávez of having
armed Cubans in his security detail. Why did they make that accusation? Because
Chávez had dark-‐skinned individuals around him who served as his security, and
they had guns.360 It was at that point that Chávez announced that Cuba did not
charge Venezuela one cent for the surgeries, medicine, and treatment that 357. Guevara, Chávez, 40. 358. Chávez, Fascist Coup, 51. 359. For entire speech, see Ibid., 49–75. 360. Chávez, Fascist Coup, 138.
205
Venezuelans received in Cuba. In the twenty speeches or interviews that I examined,
Chávez never hesitated to name Africa as a friend of Venezuela or to hail Latin
America as mixed-‐race America. Also, he included the Caribbean in his discourse
and in his policies—a Caribbean that was distanced in policy and pronouncements
from the European Venezuelans because of its association with Black peoples,
according to Venezuelan Woman #2. But every one of the speeches or interviews
that I examine is dated after 2002. It very well could be that because he was so
broadly insulted in the same demeaning terms that had previously been applied to
Afro-‐Venezuelans, that Chávez decided to own his racial identity.
Hugo Chávez: The Liberator
At last, completely liberated from the endoracismo, or internalized racism,
experienced by people of color in Eurocentric, neocolonial, dominator/oppressed
situations, Hugo Chávez turned his attentions to the rest of the region in order to
liberate it. As has already been stated, Hugo Chávez quoted Frantz Fanon in 2004
when, in describing his policies, he said, “This is a different Venezuela, where the
wretched of the earth know that they can free themselves from their past. And this
is a different Latin America.”361
Freedom From Neoliberalism
Speaking specifically of the Free Trade of the Americas Agreement (FTAA),
another neoliberal proposal from the United States to open local markets to United
States corporations, Chávez said that Brazil and Argentina were close to his position
of opposition and that the fifteen member states and the five associate members of
361. Guevara, Chávez, Venezuela, 5.
206
the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) were opposed almost in entirety. In speaking
to Guevara, Chávez said that the idea of The Bolivarian Alliance (formerly
Alternative) for the Peoples of Our America, ALBA, came to him while he was
speaking with Fidel and was in the midst of what he called the second coup attempt
against him, the PDVSA workers’ strike. The idea of an alternative, a Bolivarian
Alternative, for the Americas was developed right then and there and ALBA against
the FTAA was born. He believed ALBA could become an alternative development
model for Latin America, utilizing the key resources of each state in a cooperative
way. Chávez counted among the achievements of ALBA:
• The ALBA Bank;
• Increased cooperation among Latin Americans;
• Sovereignty as a result of union;
• The ALBA Food Security Treaty;
• A telecommunications treaty to be signed that would include a submarine
cable from Cuba to Venezuela that would eventually connect Central
America as a reflection of liberation through technology;
• Latin American School of Medicine, which was funded on April 15,
2007.362
Chávez envisioned ALBA as a counter to the “free trade” mantra of
neoliberalism that always served the interests of those making the proposal to the
362. Hugo Chávez, With ALBA, Peoples Awaken: Words of the President Hugo Chávez FrÍas. Opening of the VI Presidential Summit of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) (Caracas: La Imprenta Nacional, Colleccion Discursos, 2008): 14–41.
207
detriment of those on the receiving end of the demand. He told Guevara that the free
trade agreements proposed by the United States violated the Venezuelan
Constitution and therefore, were unconstitutional for Venezuela to ratify. He said
that the power of imperialism is immense and that they can conduct blackmail with
a single simple phone call.
Freedom Inside Venezuela
In Venezuela, the Revolution set up state-‐owned companies that operated in
partnership with the workers. Missions were created to address the specific needs
of the poor and marginalized, like for example, health care, vocational training, food,
and literacy. To cut down on imports, the Missions take the unemployed and give
them work on idle land to produce what is imported. The idea is to provide work
that is also training that is also needed production. Chávez also followed the lead
from two ideas of Mohammad Yunus,363 winner of the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize for
his pioneering work with Grameen Bank: microloans made to individuals, but in the
name of a community, and social business that allows the poor to become
self-‐sufficient while the entire society gains by recycling money for greater impact.
Venezuela now has over three thousand communal banks making such loans.
Chávez believed that the appropriate economic structures for Venezuela in the
Twenty-‐First Century were Venezuelan Indigenous Socialism. By that, he meant a
homegrown economics of equality based on love and solidarity.364 Chávez created
363. Muhammad Yunus, with Karl Weber, Building Social Business: The New Kind of Capitalism That Serves Humanity’s Most Pressing Needs (Dhaka, Bangladesh: University Press, 2010). 364. Hugo Chávez, Speech of Unity, December 15, 2006 (Caracas: Socialism of the XXI Century, 2007), 41.
208
defensive organizations in order to blunt European penetration into the
revolutionary ethos that was developing in Venezuela.
The Revolution also stopped and reversed the privatization of Venezuela’s oil
company, PDVSA. Chávez had seen that the business and technocratic elite in
Venezuela were allied with Washington, D.C. and took their orders from there.
Freeing the Venezuelan Military
Chávez cultivated that new Latin America by nurturing a new consciousness
inside the military and with the radicals who were in touch with the guerrillas and
political operatives who all believed in a better Venezuela. He remembered Bolivar’s
curse for any military that turned its swords against its own people. He sought to
free the military from this curse and from its use by non-‐Venezuelans to achieve
non-‐Venezuelan goals.
Chávez also knew the character and nature of his opposition. First of all, he
said that the previous Venezuelan heads of State were merely puppets and lackeys.
Washington, D.C. was the real seat of power in Venezuela, according to Chávez. His
insight came when, as a military officer, he was sent to Colombia to fight against the
guerrillas there. He said that the Venezuelan military had been mobilized as a result
of orders from Washington, D.C. In his conversation with Guevara, Chávez said that
the Bolivarian Revolution stopped all cooperation with the United States against the
Colombian guerrillas while maintaining that this was a matter for Colombians to
sort out.
Chávez declared that it was this new spirit that gelled and allowed him to
defeat the anti-‐Chávez coup from inside the military. He said to Guevara that many
209
of the military, from the army, navy, air force, and national guard just flatly refused
to follow the orders that came down from “the Pentagon and the traitor generals.”365
Securing Freedom through Hemispheric and Global Cooperation
In 2003, Chávez was ready to share Venezuela’s good fortune with the rest of
the world. He wanted to reestablish the North–South Dialogue (a process of dialogue
aimed at ironing out differences between the European countries of the Northern
Hemisphere and non-‐European countries in the Southern Hemisphere). He also
wanted to reestablish South–South Cooperation, a philosophy that non-‐European
countries of the Southern Hemisphere should practice cooperative economics as
much as possible. Chávez developed an approach to help feed the world’s hungry
and made that proposal to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO). The idea was for Venezuela to provide the land, water, fertilizer, and for
other countries to provide everything else needed to grow food. Then, at harvest
time, those countries that had contributed to the production could reap some of the
bounty. Everything produced within that particular geographic area would be
donated and not sold. When he made the proposal, the response was to remind him
that the World Trade Organization (WTO) regulations would not allow him to feed
hungry people. Chávez was both astonished and disgusted.
Chávez also saw South-‐South Cooperation in the Hemisphere as necessary.
He focused his attention on Haiti, the Caribbean, and South America, as well as Latin
America as a whole.
365. Guevara, Chávez, Venezuela, 31.
210
Freeing Haiti, Again
Chávez readily drew from the experiences of those who had created
revolution in the past: the Haitians. I have already discussed how Chávez was the
first Latin American Head of State to travel to Haiti to thank the Haitians for their
assistance in freeing Latin America due to their work with and support of Simon
Bolivar. On returning from a state visit to that country, Chávez posed the question to
the National Assembly, “Why is Haiti Poor?” and then answered, calling the Haitians
“The Black Jacobins,” using the name of the book written by C.L.R. James.
In this speech,366 Chávez acknowledges that Haiti, the land of the Black
Jacobins, the land of Toussaint and Pétion, is the place where the dream of freedom
was birthed. Including freedom for the people of Venezuela and the revolution of
South America. He says that Haiti is a sister. He reads what Fidel Castro has given in
his most recent reflections, as the reason that Haiti is poor.367 Fidel wrote that not a
single person speaks of it, but Haiti was the first country that stopped the European
human trafficking that was slavery.368 Castro had noted that Africans were trafficked
for more than one century to Haiti to work the sugar and coffee plantations of the
Europeans. Yet, those slaves were able to defeat Napoleon.
Chávez’s speech continued quoting Fidel’s statement that Haiti is in misery
today because the nation is the product of colonialism and imperialism. In this
speech, Chávez says that from military interventions and the extraction of Haiti’s 366. “Hugo Chávez R I P Venezuela President Why Haiti Is Poor?” YouTube video, 6:21, posted by Cynthia McKinney, May 22, 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fbeMKi51xc&feature=youtu.be. 367. Fidel Castro, “Haiti’s Lesson,” Cubadebate, http://en.cubadebate.cu/reflections-‐fidel/2010/01/14/haitis-‐lesson/. 368. C.L.R. James, Black Jacobins.
211
riches, Haiti today is a shame for our age. When Chávez visited Haiti, the public
response was so huge that Chávez was motivated to get out of his truck and join the
Haitians running alongside. He told a person next to him that the gates of hell had
opened and it was full of Black angels. These Haitians, he said, are an angelic people.
Freeing the Caribbean
Chávez embraced the Caribbean. I have already discussed CELAC, which
brought together every one of the countries in the region for a successful 2014
Summit, and I have mentioned PetroCaribe as another demonstration of his
outreach to, instead of his fear of, Caribbean countries. PetroCaribe was the
brainchild of Hugo Chávez and was launched in 2005. It began as an oil alliance, but
is creeping into other areas of economic cooperation. Chávez envisioned both
PetroCaribe and the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) as
examples of revolutionary union among the people. In 2007, at the Fourth Summit
of PetroCaribe, Chávez opened his welcoming speech369 with a reminder that the
Carib Indigenous peoples were America’s first victims of European colonialism in
this Hemisphere. He described the Caribbean as the place where the first African
slaves were trafficked to and where the fight against imperialism is historic. He said
that it is in the Caribbean that the world’s two most important revolutions took
place: the Haitian Revolution of 1791 to 1804 and the Cuban Revolution from 1959
to today. This initiated, to Chávez, a tradition of rebellion that the region would
become known for—from Toussaint L’Ouverture to Fidel Castro. Chávez said that
the insurgents of the Caribbean are like Shakespeare’s Caliban, the rebel slave. And 369. Hugo Chávez, PetroCaribe, Towards a New Order in Our America (Caracas: La Imprenta Nacional, Coleccion Discursos, 2008).
212
citing the Caribbean literary tradition, Chávez questioned how long it would be that
the United States would dominate the Latin American and Caribbean people. He
said, recalling the conclusion of Cuban writer, Roberto Fernandez Retamar, “Our
Caribbean-‐influenced identity is more accurately expressed through Caliban.”370
And he proclaimed to his fellow heads of government that they should be Calibans
every day.
Chávez said that, because of the geostrategic value of oil, the resource must
be Caliban, too. After all, it is Black. Chávez said that PetroCaribe must be
understood in relation to Caliban. PetroCaribe represents energy cooperation, he
said, that can overcome capitalism and the remaining vestiges of slavery and
colonialism that were inherited by all of the region’s countries. Chávez added that
PetroCaribe was formed to counter an increasingly inhuman and unfair global order.
He said that PetroCaribe was aimed at solving asymmetries and that it was about
liberation. Noting that “free trade” did not exist, Chávez elaborated how PetroCaribe
would be a liberating, fair exchange system among Caribbean countries. He stressed
that PetroCaribe is not just about oil, but also about all appropriate energy
platforms, including solar and wind.
In talking about the Caribbean and revolution, Chávez was sure to mention
Cuban revolutionary hero José Marti as well as Venezuelan heroes Negro Miguel
who headed Venezuela’s very first Black revolution in 1533 and Simon Bolivar.
Chávez said that from these rebellious traditions came the revolutions that now
mark Latin America and the Caribbean and he once again thanked Haiti for its role
370. Ibid., 15.
213
in the liberation of the Caribbean and Latin America. He recalled that two
PetroCaribe summits were held in 2005, one in June in Venezuela in Puerto La Cruz
and the other one in September in Montego Bay, Jamaica. At those two summits
attendees described the energy situation of each state and assessed the renewable
energy potential of each state. At the Third Summit, leaders signed the Energy
Security Treaty. At the Fourth Summit, they set forward six objectives, according to
Chávez:
• Bring the Cienfuegos [Cuba] Refinery online for processing and storing oil
so that the region has another processing center other than that in
Venezuela;
• The development of a fund to finance alternative energy products in the
region, that is, solar, geothermal, and wind;
• An exchange when the bill is due for the oil supplied by Venezuela so that
the countries pay by supplying goods and services;
• To propose other financing mechanisms;
• Creation of two Committees that would process requests; and
• Consolidation of the PetroCaribe Secretariat Office to broaden planning,
operations, and follow up.371
Chávez said that PetroCaribe was a matter of national security for Venezuela
because having access to enough energy was a matter of security for the entire
region. Chávez reminded the attendees of Bolivar’s words that if the Americas did
not come together, a new kind of colonialism could be imposed on the region.
371. Ibid., 37–54.
214
In total, there are eighteen members of PetroCaribe. Through this
mechanism, Chávez foresaw national debt becoming not a problem, but a “great leap
forward”372 to liberation. Chávez did not stop dreaming: He foresaw a
“PetroAmerica”373 comprised of Venezuela’s PDVSA, Brazil’s PETROBRAS,
Colombia’s COPETROL, Ecuador’s PETRO-‐ECUADOR, Peru’s PETROPERU, and
Trinidad’s PETROTRIN. With his imagination rolling, he remarked to Guevara that
PetroAmerica had the makings of a Latin American OPEC.
Chávez said that ALBA and PetroCaribe were linked, begun from the same
conscience. He said that the greatest weakness of the PetroCaribe and ALBA
countries was transportation. Therefore, Chávez proposed a Caribbean naval fleet to
allow commerce among the member countries of both ALBA and PetroCaribe. He
was proposing nothing less, he said, than the creation of a new economic space that
could be a model for the rest of the world of political and economic integration,
crafted in harmony and respect—unlike the free trade agreements proposed by the
United States.
Freeing South America
When Chávez was visiting Brazil on May 23, 2008, he spoke about the
identity of South Americans. He said that sometimes South Americans are called
Latin Americans and they accept that; and that sometimes they are called
Ibero-‐Americans, but that he preferred Indo-‐American. But what he wanted to
stress was that he recognized that South America also exists. And therefore, in order
to prevent its recolonization, he envisioned UNASUR, the Unión de Naciones 372. Ibid., PetroCaribe, 47. 373. Guevara, Chávez, Venezuela, 103.
215
Suramericanas (the Union of South American Nations). He compared the Union to a
fist—a block of nations to counter neoliberalism. He also said that while
neoliberalism promotes integration, what he was promoting was union. He noted
that millions of people in South America had voted liberationists into power: Lula in
Brazil, him, Chávez, in Venezuela, the Kirchners in Argentina, Correa in Ecuador,
Morales in Bolivia and that the winning coalition was of the poor and the middle
class. He said that the oligarchy must not be allowed to separate the middle classes
from their winning coalition. All twelve governments of South America signed the
Treaty and joined UNASUR.
Chávez added that the militaries of the region must never become troops of
occupation for imperial power. He spoke of the United States decision to reactivate
its Fourth Fleet. He said that the Fourth Fleet was now a reality—although a relic
from the Cold War—and that Latin America would have to deal with it. He said that
this force was there to serve as a distraction and to dissuade South America from
the revolutionary path that they are currently on. Chávez asked, “Are they going to
dissuade us?” And then he answered his own question, “No one will stop us. No one
will frighten us. No one will dissuade us from the path we have chosen… The Fourth
Fleet is a threat for all of us.”374 Chávez reminded the others in attendance that in
1998, he floated the idea of a “South Atlantic Treaty Organization” that went
nowhere. But now, ten years later, when Brazilian President, Lula, suggested that
there must be a way to end their subordination to the Inter-‐American Defense
374. Chávez, ALBA, 58–59.
216
Board,375 eleven of the twelve members supported it, with only Colombia saying that
it could not at that time participate.376 Chávez was elated that history had been
made.377 He ended his remarks by saying that he was sure that eventually Colombia,
too, would join with them militarily. Elated at the tremendous success of the
UNASUR Summit, Chávez concluded that the United States empire lost on that day in
May 2008.
Freeing Africa
In 2006, Abuja, Nigeria hosted the first Africa-‐South America Summit. Chávez
envisioned the Africa-‐South America Summit process as a way to invigorate
South-‐South cooperation. This meeting produced the Abuja Plan of Action where the
heads of state agreed to meet every two years, with ministerial meetings to take
place during the interval. At the first Ministerial meeting in 2008, the decision was
made to group the areas of cooperation into eight working groups:
• Culture and Education;
375. The Inter-‐American Defense Board is headquartered in Washington, D.C. and has twenty-‐seven members. It was created in 1942 to provide military advice to membership of the Organization of American States. It can hardly be expected to intervene when one of its more powerful members, especially the United States takes threatening or even military action against other less powerful member states. See COHA, “The South American Defense Council, UNASUR, the Latin American Military and the Region’s Political Process,” Council on Hemispheric Affairs, October 1, 2008, http://www.coha.org/the-‐south-‐american-‐defense-‐council-‐unasur-‐the-‐latin-‐american-‐military-‐and-‐the-‐region’s-‐political-‐process/ 376. Colombia’s hesitation to join UNASUR arose from its reliance on United States military support and presence in struggles against guerillas. UNASUR’s founding philosophy of South American solidarity against the US was seen as a threat to those relations. See “Colombia Refuses to Join Regional Defense Council,” Colombia Reports, May 24, 2008, http://colombiareports.co/colombia-‐refuses-‐to-‐join-‐south-‐american-‐defense-‐council/. 377. Trinidad and Tobago was invited to join UNASUR by Venezuelan President and successor to Hugo Chávez, Nicolas Maduro.
217
• Science, Technology, ITCs, and Media;
• Agriculture and Environment;
• Social Issues and Sports;
• Trade, Investment, and Tourism;
• Capacity Building, Public Administration, and Governance;
• Infrastructure, Transport, and Energy; and
• Peace and Security.
In 2009, Venezuela hosted the Second Africa-‐South America Summit where
the participating heads of state and governments affirmed the decisions made in
Abuja. They also affirmed the historical and cultural ties that inspired the
relationship and that they would seek closer cooperation between UNASUR and the
African Union378 Participating leaders declared that this new relationship was good
for South-‐South relations. The Delegates also recognized the participation of
Afro-‐descendant population in South America in the ASA process. They stated their
objections to arms and human trafficking, mercenarism, and transnational
organized crime. Delegates also talked about piracy and its root causes, and called
for peaceful resolution of current disputes about the Malvinas Island, South Georgia,
the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia, Tromelin, Mayotte Island, and the
South Sandwich Islands They reaffirmed their commitment to the reform of the
United Nations. And finally, they “gladly” accepted Libya’s offer to host the Third
Africa-‐South America Summit in 2011.
378. The African Union (AU) is a continent-‐wide organization, precursor to the United States of Africa that Kwame Nkrumah envisioned when he helped to form the Organization of African Unity (OAU). The AU is a successor organization to the OAU.
218
The Africa-‐South America Summit that was to be held in Libya in 2011 was
postponed and held instead in February 2013 in Equatorial Guinea. It was decided
to invite the Caribbean and Central American states to join the Summit process and
that the Fourth Summit would be held in Ecuador in 2016 and every three years
thereafter.379
The Africa-‐South America Summits were envisioned by Chávez as a way to
bring closer political and economic ties between Africa and South America and was
the cornerstone of his idea of South-‐South collaboration. This meant new levels of
cooperation between countries of the “South” (or Third World) as opposed to the
normal post-‐ or neo-‐colonial relations with Europe.
A “Radio of the South” and a “Bank of the South” were ideas that were
formalized in the Second Africa-‐South America Summit held in Venezuela in 2009.
The plan for Radio of the South, RadioSur, was that it be an exchange of news to
reach audiences in North, Central, and South America, the Caribbean, and Africa. The
station is now fully operative, including live streaming online.380
The idea of a “Bank of the South” was negatively critiqued by Vikram Modi in
the Harvard International Review as the “Banco del Chávez.”381 The purpose of the
Bank would be to stop the transfer of wealth out of the South into the North and
eventually to replace the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
379. For more on the Africa-‐South America Summit, see Tamara Pearson, “Africa-‐South America Summit in Venezuela Cements South-‐South Collaboration,” venezuelanalysis.com, http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/4822. 380. It can be listened to at http://laradiodelsur.com.ve/. 381, Vikram Modi, “Banco del Chávez: Undermining Liberal Capitalism,” Harvard International Review 29, no. 3 (October 1, 2007): 10–11, http://hir.harvard.edu/archives/1671.
219
Therefore, the Bank of the ASA, Banasa—envisioned as a South-‐South financial
system—was seen by Chávez to be a key point toward the liberation of South
finances from their neocolonial character. He said, “The transfer of resources from
the South to the North is a tremendous figure and they lend that money back to us
with interest rates far superior to what they pay us . . . but we’re not stupid, we are
waking up and they won’t keep manipulating us with this tale of the ‘free market.’
”382 Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela became
the Bank’s first signatories at the Second ASA Summit. Banco del Sur opened its
doors in June 2013.
Importantly, at the 2009 Africa-‐South America Summit, Chávez and Qaddafi
made a joint call for a Southern Hemisphere collective security pact like NATO
(North American Treaty Organization) to prevent future interventions, further
aggressions, and resource theft by the North. But events took an opposite course.
With the bombing of Libya completed, along with the disintegration of its Great
Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,383 Hugo Chávez wrote his “A Letter to
Africa” in February 2013. And a few days later, Chávez himself was dead.
Chávez’s Letter to Africa—Conscious Leadership and Legacy on Race
Hugo Chávez’s “Letter to Africa” is an indication of the importance that he
placed on relations with the people of Africa. In the letter he insisted that the Latin
382. Pearson, Africa-‐South America Summit. 383. Libya was known in ancient times as the land of Northwest Africa. The name “Libya” was officially adopted in the 1930s. After the bloodless coup against the King of Libya by Muammar Qaddafi, the country was renamed the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. Jamahiriya means “nation of the masses” or “people’s nation” in Arabic. For more information on the history of Libya see, for example, John Wright, A History of Libya (London: C. Hurst, 2012).
220
Americans and Africans were actually one people. He wrote, “I won’t tire of
repeating that we are one people.” Chávez wrote that the two continents must move
forward together in order to ensure their sovereignty. He also said that the two
peoples were joined together not only by racial ties, but also by spiritual ties. The
“Letter to Africa” is a powerful marker, in the Chávez context, of race pride, the
fulfillment of his statement that he loved “Mother Africa.”
Because of his cancer, President Chávez was not able to personally attend the
Third Africa-‐South America Summit. But his “Letter” was read by Foreign Minister
Elias Jaua (himself an Afro-‐descendant Venezuelan) to the sixty-‐three countries
attending the summit in Equatorial Guinea in February 2013. The Third Summit was
supposed to have been hosted by Libya in 2011, but had to be postponed and the
location changed due to the NATO bombing of Libya initiated by United States
President Barack Obama in March 2011 and which lasted throughout the remainder
of that year.
Similarly, the empires of the past, guilty of kidnapping and murdering millions of daughters and sons of Mother Africa, as a means of feeding an exploitative slave system in their colonies, implanted the seeds of African warrior blood and fighting spirit in our America, which produced the burning desire for freedom. Those seeds germinated and our land engendered men as grand as Toussaint L’Ouverture, Alexandre Pétion, José Leonardo Chirino, and Pedro Camejo, among many others, resulting in the initiation of an independentist, unionist, anti-‐imperialist and restorative process in Latin America and the Caribbean, over 200 years ago.384
By invoking the names of these rebellious slaves and former slaves, Chávez’s
“Letter to Africa” was a discourse rooted in history, unequal power, European
domination by way of enslavement and settler colonialism, oppression, identity, 384. English translation from “Letter from Hugo Chávez to Africa” Pambazuka News 625, April 10, 2013, http://www.pambazuka.net/en/category/features/86934.
221
resistance, and, generally, of global structures laced with unjust outcomes. This is
typical of the Chávez discourse on race, power, and history.
In this “Letter,” Chávez writes of his love for these two continents and
reiterated a point that sounded the alarm of subjugated identity in Freirean terms: “I
say this from the depths of my consciousness; South American and Africa are one
single people.”385 Chávez goes further and states that the unity between the peoples
of Africa and “Our America” “is not only racial, but also spiritual.”386 As if prompted
by Iris Marion Young,387 he recites the historic injustice: “Similarly, the empires of
the past, guilty of kidnapping and murdering millions of daughters and sons of
Mother Africa, as a means of feeding an exploitative slave system in their colonies,
implanted the seeds of African warrior blood and fighting spirit in Our America,
which produced the burning desire for freedom.” But not lingering just in the past,
Chávez quickly moves to twentieth century transformational leaders who he sees as
heroes and martyrs: “Patrice Lumumba, Amilcar Cabral, and Nelson Mandela, just to
name a few,” he writes. And consistent with Fanonian resistance, he writes, “Today,
more than ever, we are the children of our liberators and their heroic deeds. We can
and must say with conviction and resolve, that this unites us in the present, in a vital
struggle for the freedom and definitive independence of our nations.”388
385. Ibid. 386. Ibid. 387. The late University of Chicago political scientist, Iris Marion Young wrote about the responsibility of those who benefit from unjust structures to correct injustice. See Iris Marion Young, Responsibility for Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). 388. Ibid.
222
Finally, Chávez makes clear his goals for Africa and South America. As if he
heard the lecture of the former World Bank President, John Wolfensohn, Chávez
writes about Wolfensohn’s “tectonic shift:”
It is in our continents that sufficient natural, political and historical resources can be found, which are necessary to save the planet from chaos that has been brought about. We must not miss today’s opportunity provided by the independentist sacrifice of our forefathers, to unify our capabilities to turn our nations into authentic centers of power which, to quote our father Simon Bolivar the Liberator, would be greater for their freedom and glory than for their extent and riches.389 Referring to the United States-‐led NATO bombing of Libya in 2011, Chávez
states his belief that the attack on Libya represents an effort on the part of the West
to thwart African union and the deepening South–South cooperation that ASA
represents. In closing, Chávez states the vision and the goal: “Let us form one
homeland, one Continent, one people at all costs.”390
All the while that Chávez was trying to make a more just society for
Venezuelans and the world, the United States was engaged in secretive tactics to
thwart his work on the Africa-‐South America Summit. Specifically, the United States
worked behind the scenes to not only find out what countries planned to attend the
Summit, but also to thwart its success.
389. Ibid. 390. Ibid.
223
Discussion, Conclusions, and Implications of This Research On Practice
Discussion
In this research I sought to typify the leadership of Hugo Chávez and to
answer the question of his legacy on race. And I had no idea what I would find going
into the research. What I found is that the record is replete with answers to that
question and examples of leadership extraordinary for his setting in Venezuela, in
Latin America. What is surprising is that so few before me have researched that
particular question. I do believe that the research question has been answered:
Hugo Chávez was able to pay attention to the matter of race in such a way as to
compile an impressive record of relief for those who had been subjected to racism.
His initiatives garnered support for him from all quarters of oppressed peoples in
many parts of the world. In fact, at several international conferences that I have
participated in,391 I have witnessed Venezuelan delegates cheered and hailed almost
as if they are “rock stars” in the struggle for recognition, human rights, and dignity
for those who are oppressed. Hugo Chávez was also a leader who fulfilled the
requirements of Burns’ Transformational Leadership; he satisfies Foucault’s
parrhesia paradigm as well as Assensoh’s African Political Leadership and Hotep’s
African-‐Centered Leadership-‐Followership.
The purpose of the study was accomplished. Now, in one place, a reader may
find an exhaustive review of the standing of Hugo Chávez on the matters of race and
race pride, in his own words, and in his policy aspirations. In one place one can also
391. I have participated in peace conferences in the mid-‐2000s in Lebanon (twice) and Malaysia where Venezuelans were greeted with wild applause and standing ovations.
224
find a thorough assessment of how race influenced Hugo Chávez’s leadership. The
literature reviewed was from a broad spectrum of related topics, from race and
racism to leadership to Hugo Chávez. Looking at Hugo Chávez from this particular
prism provides a new way of understanding both his allure and the loathing for him
in certain quarters.
Conclusions
Controversy arose not only from what Chávez said, but also from what he
did. As the Head of State of a founding member of the Organization of the Petroleum
Exporting Countries (OPEC), Chávez had the means to do a lot. If threat is calculated
as the product of motive, opportunity, and means, Chávez’s access to petrodollars
added considerably to his ability to threaten transformation of the global economic
and political system so long as he possessed both motive and opportunity—and he
did.
Hugo Chávez was on the cutting edge of tectonic global demographic change:
the kind of change foretold by former World Bank President James Wolfensohn.392
In this research, my goal was to look at an understudied aspect of the life,
leadership, and legacy of Hugo Chávez—that of his racial identity—and how that
racial identity was manifested in the policies and practices of the Bolivarian
Republic of Venezuela under Chávez’s guidance. I used scholarly literature about
leadership, neoliberalism, race, and justice and on Hugo Chávez, as a part of the
conceptual framework for the investigation. I used a qualitative research
methodology to analyze Hugo Chávez. I used participant interviews, published
392. “Former World Bank President: Big Shift.” (See chap. 1, note 22).
225
literature on information about U.S. covert action against the Bolivarian Revolution,
and Hugo Chávez’s own speeches and policies. I found that much of the
peer-‐reviewed literature on Hugo Chávez portrays him negatively. This negative
portrayal of Chávez in the peer-‐reviewed literature is consistent with the depictions
of Chávez in politically influential and non-‐peer-‐reviewed United States foreign
policy literature.
Hugo Chávez demonstrated characteristics of Transformational Leadership,
parrhesia, African-‐Centered Leadership-‐Followership, and African Political
Leadership. I found that Chávez’s epic struggle against neoliberalism was grounded
in the experience with inequality caused by it—an inequality that was built upon
five hundred years of European domination of the Americas through genocide,
human trafficking, slavery, capitalism, colonialism, neocolonialism, and
globalization.
This research found that Hugo Chávez’s leadership arose from the unique
circumstances of the Caracazo, where Venezuelans rebelled against neoliberal
policies after having voted for a presidential candidate who promised relief and then
reneged on that promise after he was elected. Chávez recognized, also, the role of
the Caracazo and the people’s rebellion against neoliberalism in his rise to power.
The rebellion signaled that the people were ready for revolution.
This research explored the taboo topic of race in Latin America and found
that the policy of mestizaje and the terminology and phraseology around the Latina
identity were merely the latest policy and language tools that perpetuate European
domination and distancing from the Africanness of the majority of the Venezuelan
226
population. Interestingly, this research also found that identity is such a powerful
pull, especially among the dominated, that someone who could overcome and attack
racism, like Fidel Castro, was unable to discuss racial identity when asked about
that, in the way that Hugo Chávez was freely able to do.
Hugo Chávez was an avid reader and read everything from Muammar
Qaddafi’s Green Book to C.L.R. James’s Black Jacobins, about the Haitian Revolution.
Chávez rooted his own discourse in his readings of prolific African leaders and
writers like Amilcar Cabral and Julius Nyerere.
It is believed that Hugo Chávez first proclaimed his African heritage publicly
around 2005 on his weekly television show. This was after the passage of the 1999
Bolivarian Constitution for the state of Venezuela; Indigenous Americans were
included in that document with special recognition of their rights and
Afro-‐Venezuelans were not included. However, in the year 2005, in a flurry of
activities—almost compensatory in nature—he began to address issues of concern
to Afro-‐Venezuelans. Four items of importance culminate this trajectory: Chávez’s
outreach to Caribbean countries, previously shunned by the European Venezuelan
political leadership as being too African; Chávez’s Africa South America Summit
process with its first Summit being held in 2006 in Nigeria; Chávez’s 2012 visit to
Haiti and his thank-‐you to Haiti for helping Simon Bolivar that occurred long before
that; and Chávez’s 2013 “A Letter to Africa.” Domestically, anti-‐discrimination laws
were passed outlawing all forms of racial and other discrimination; at long last,
Afro-‐Venezuelans occupied positions of authority within the Bolivarian Government
as Ministers and Ambassadors.
227
Hugo Chávez’s race pride evoked a strong and negative reaction from
European Venezuelans.
• Mockery of Chávez, Maduro, and supporters in cartoons and other media;
• Attempts to turn back the social programs for the poor;
• Assertion of the idea that there are no Black Venezuelans and the Blacks
in Venezuela are actually Cubans;
• Criminalizing Blacks in the media, exacerbating White Fear;
• Glorification of “Gochoismo” [White Supremacy]
It was found in this research that Hugo Chávez grounded himself in the
struggles of previous Latin American or African leaders who sought to liberate the
oppressed, especially Simon Bolivar whose name was used by Chávez to define his
military rebellion when he formed the Revolutionary Bolivarian Army from within
the ranks of the Venezuelan military. I found that Hugo Chávez actually
accomplished one of the most important types of liberation for those who are
oppressed, and that is liberation of the mind. This led to Hugo Chávez celebrating
the very parts of the Venezuelan culture that were looked down upon by European
Venezuelans, like his singing of the old folk songs and wearing the clothes familiar to
those growing up on the plains of Venezuela. For example, he campaigned wearing
the liqui-‐liqui, traditional clothes of the Venezuelan plainsman.
Finally, unlike most of the peer-‐reviewed literature on Hugo Chávez, this
research looked overtly at the leadership and legacy of Hugo Chávez through the
lens of race. This study found that Hugo Chávez grounded his historical discourse in
the triumphs and trials of African leadership inside Venezuela, in the Caribbean, and
228
on the Continent of Africa. Thus, Hugo Chávez led powerful political change that
personally improved the lives of Venezuelan women, Afro-‐ and Indigenous
Venezuelans, and that helped in the liberation struggle of people of color and their
supporters all around the world. In a compliment of the highest order for
African-‐centered political leadership, after his death, Hugo Chávez was called “A
Maroon President” by the founder of the Afro-‐Venezuelan Network, Jesus Chucho
Garcia.393 Finally, this research found that Hugo Chávez practiced parrhesia,
Transformational, and African-‐centered, and African Political Leadership that
liberated the oppressed and inspired a new generation of leaders both inside
Venezuela and around the world.
Implications for Future Research
By focusing the spotlight on Hugo Chávez and race while contextualizing his
struggle for justice and equality against neoliberal prescriptions of domination
coming from Washington, D.C., it is hoped that a new type of conversation can be
started about the impact of Hugo Chávez’s leadership. That conversation can now be
held, not from the vantage point of the United States or of Europeans inside or
outside of Venezuela, but instead, from the point of view of people of color and those
under the thumb of domination and injustice. What previously has been a
monologue can now become a true conversation.
The nature of Burns’ transformational leadership is that it begets more
leaders. If transformational leadership could be viewed within the prism of complex
adaptive leadership, then emergent leadership along the lines of Ché Guevara’s
393. Garcia, A Maroon President.
229
“One, Two Three Vietnams,” becomes a real possibility. In fact, this is exactly what
happened in the United States during the Civil Rights Movement and the
anti-‐Vietnam War agitations. Recognition of the possibilities associated with this
kind of potential development also increases the threat—to the unjust system and to
the leaders who emerge to combat it. Knowledge then, of the methods by which the
unjust system has extended its power, is critical information to the success of any
counter movement whose goal is the replacement of unjust structures with those
that produce justice for all. In this regard, the work of Iris Marion Young394 and
Jeffrey B. Perry395 provide critical insights on what individuals who benefit from
unjust structures can do to increase justice. However, it is equally clear that good
individual deeds will not be sufficient to transform historic and unjust global
structures. For that task, leadership is necessary. And further research specifically
on the Hugo Chávez model of leadership and solutions is appropriately called for in
future research.
My research also generates other questions that are only hinted at here: for
example, the fate of transformational, parrhesiastic, leaders who operate at the
national and international levels. Heifetz and Linsky discuss their concept of
394. Iris Marion Young, Responsibility for Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). 395. For Perry’s discussion of Theodore W. Allen’s work including the pioneering book, The Invention of the White Race, as well as discussions on Hubert Harrison (who pioneered work on how race operates in the United States and the Caribbean); see Jeffery B. Perry, “The Developing Conjuncture and Some Insights from Hubert Harrison and Theodore W. Allen on the Centrality of the Fight against White Supremacy,” Cultural Logic: Marxist Theory in Practice, 2010, http://clogic.eserver.org/2010/Perry.pdf. See also Perry’s website, www.jeffreybperry.net.
230
“Leadership on the Line”396 for leaders who operate in risky situations, but they do
not provide enough guidance for those transformational leaders or their staffs
operating at the cutting edge and leading transformational global change that
empowers those at the bottom against those who are already at the top. This is the
substance of Chávez’s leadership and Chávez was not alone operating at this level. It
should be noted that Nelson Mandela and Fidel Castro are unique in living to ripe
old ages. Most of Chávez’s heroes and other transformational leaders who acted
with them did not live long lives and many were assassinated.
This leads me to methods that transformational leaders and their followers
can use to signal to the public at large the authenticity of the transformational
leader. How else can the public protect the leader if they do not know that one
leader is authentic as opposed to being one that has been planted for the purpose of
tricking and controlling the people? The number two man at the FBI, Assistant
Director William Sullivan, serving under longtime FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, was
explicitly working on a project to “switch” leaders for Blacks in the United States by
providing Blacks in the United States a hand-‐picked leader who had been chosen by
the FBI, instead of by the people, themselves. Thus, political and other powers in the
United States found authentic Black leadership inconvenient, that is, leadership like
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, and members of the Black Panther Party and
other Black nationalist or Pan-‐African groups inside the United States I liken this to
regime change on Blacks in the United States, similar to the art of regime change
396. Ronald Abadian Heifetz and Martin Linsky. Leadership on the Line: Staying Alive Through the Dangers of Leading (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press, 2002).
231
practiced against foreign governments.397 It is my belief that the documents
released during the time frame of U.S. Congressional investigations of U.S. domestic
and foreign intelligence activities provide a roadmap for determining the risks that
such transformational leaders must navigate. Without firm knowledge and acute
awareness, including self-‐awareness, in such circumstances, transformational
leaders will continue to experience heightened risk and danger above that normally
associated with the job and the lifestyle. In the end, it is unlikely that most risk can
be mitigated. However, if the transformational leaders themselves are to experience
the product of their labors, then they and those who love them must ensure their
longevity. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke about longevity in the last speech that he
gave on this Earth. Dr. King said:
Like anybody, I would like to live a long life; longevity has its place. But I’m not worried about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you, but I want you to know tonight that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land. So, I’m happy tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.398
Dr. King was acutely aware of the danger that stalked him. He did not change
his moral positions; but perhaps had his supporters known then what we know
now, there might have been a way to provide Dr. King the longevity about which he
spoke. Hugo Chávez spoke openly about his cancer and the cancer of the leaders of
397. Information on this aspect of the COINTELPRO program and the Sullivan memo is located at http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-‐committee-‐report/part-‐2e.html#domestic. 398. For full text and audio of this speech see Martin Luther King, Jr., “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop” delivered April 3, 1968, Memphis, Tennessee, American Rhetoric Top 100 Speeches, http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/ mlkivebeentothemountaintop.htm.
232
Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay. In addition, the former Haitian President, René
Préval also has made the regular trek to Cuba for cancer treatments. Clearly,
something is going on in Latin America and the Caribbean among Chávez-‐friendly
government leaders that has direct implications for practice at this level.
To more accurately assess the danger that such leaders invite by their
political positions, I believe that more research needs to be done on COINTELPRO
because this represents the documented extent to which the United States
government will go to quash dissent on the national and international levels. In
addition to the COINTELPRO documents, restricted government documents,
combined with information on CRYPTOME, can give a glimpse into official and
semi-‐official United States government conduct when it does not appreciate the
political positions of foreign leaders. The limitation on relying solely on these
documents is that they exist only to the extent that there are insiders who are
willing to blow the whistle on conduct that they believe is unconstitutional or
otherwise unlawful or immoral. In addition, there are no documents classified at the
“TOP SECRET” level in the WikiLeaks Cablegate documents.
More research needs to be done on how transformational leaders, operating
at the political national and international levels can be protected. And, more
research needs to be done on the Heifetz and Linsky concept of “Leadership on the
Line”, extending their analysis to the kind of political leadership that challenges
power, empowers the powerless, and walks with a unique type of danger. Of course,
the dangerous nature of this kind of leadership—and by definition with
Parrhesiastes—will not be eliminated completely, no matter how much one studies
233
or researches. However, there are two points to this line of reasoning: one, to
mitigate the danger as much as possible with awareness of it and two, to
communicate both the danger and the transformationality of the leader to the less
attentive public for increased penetration of the message of hope and change.
Finally, there must be some mechanism for communicating to potential
followers of such leadership the authenticity and potential of that leadership. The
leader-‐follower process has been studied, but in a political setting, where there is
much controversy and negative and untrue information paraded as news, how do
the kinds of leaders that we discuss here, transformational leaders operating at
especially high national and international political levels, command enough of the
inattentive public’s attention? Chávez was able to use sixty seconds of live television
to communicate his message to a public that had become attentive due to his
attempted coup against a government mired in neoliberal prescriptions that were
hated by the people. How might this be accomplished short of attempted coups
d’état?
An additional finding in this research was the use of civil rights tactics and
pro-‐democracy language to destabilize revolutionary, pro-‐democracy governments.
New research should follow this up with more specific examples of the turning on its
head of the work, language, and memory of civil rights and dignity icons of the
twentieth century.
Implications for Future Practice
For a small group of transformational political leaders operating at the
national and international levels, Hugo Chávez represents a model that future
234
leaders might be able to follow. All of these were not only admirable but worthy of
imitation: his ability to seize the moment and turn disaster into good political
fortune; his deft use of even the hostile media to promote his cause; the grounding
of his discourse in historical figures with whom the target population would be
familiar; his decision to try with ballots what others in Venezuela had attempted
with bullets; and his willingness to share what he learned so as to inform others.
Hugo Chávez also created a network of leaders around him who shared his political
ideology, so that his impact was multiplied worldwide. Any one of these could be
used as a topic for more research. Every one of these aspects of Hugo Chávez’s
leadership is important for practitioners. Perhaps most important to me, personally,
is spreading the news that Hugo Chávez was fighting hard for those who today are
voiceless in the international political arena. What a shame it is for people to have a
champion and not even know it. The means by which dissent and potentially
adversarial leadership are quashed are far more sophisticated today than in the
time of COINTELPRO. However, awareness of at least these means is crucial in
today’s practice, especially if we are ever to see a more just international structure.
Another important lesson that can be drawn from the Chávez experience is
that United States efforts to destabilize Venezuela using the same template that had
been used in other countries was not successful because Chávez refused to fire on
his own people. Personnel at the U.S. covert private spy agency, Stratfor were,
indeed, frustrated by and deeply regretted Chávez’s restraint!399
399. See “Don’t F*ck with the M*rigold, B*tches,” BoRev.net, November 11, 2007, http://www.borev.net/2007/11/dont_fck_with_the_mrigold_btch.html.
235
Implications for My Practice
One of the most significant messages to me of Hugo Chávez’s practice of
leadership is that it is possible for those of us who want a more just world to win.
With everything that was against him—where he was born, what he looked like, the
daring steps he had taken in failure—Hugo Chávez was able to win and, in victory,
he garnered the love of the people that he had for them. Hugo Chávez withstood the
most vicious attacks on him by media allied with the opposition. He operated in an
environment where shame of African-‐ness was the norm and his racial phenotype
was used in and by the media against him in an effort to use that shame to deny him
support from the public. Therefore, Chávez was attacked at his very essence. He
withstood the attacks and was able to deliver a counterblow that was heard by the
very people who were supposed to be made ashamed by their very own phenotypic
attributes. The Hugo Chávez model of leadership demonstrates to me that it is still
possible to challenge power at the highest levels and win—although longevity is not
necessarily assured.
My Thoughts on This Research
As a result of this research, I have contemplated the nature of
transformational leadership in our present-‐day circumstances and how it might
look. I have wondered if such leadership could be successful in implanting in the
people a hopeful sense of what is possible and get them busy actually doing it.
Venezuela is a good example of what the people can do to create their own
leadership and what that leadership can do to create more possibilities for freedom
and justice for the people. Who would have thought that, so far, the best twenty-‐first
236
century example of African-‐centered leadership would not have emerged on the
African Continent, but instead arose from South America?
This has led me to contemplate the nature of good and moral leadership, in
general. I asked myself, “Is it possible for a European to be an African-‐centered
leader?” And conversely, “Is it possible that Europeans will ever accept
non-‐European leadership that truly seeks to overturn the injustice of the current
global order?” Actually, this is just me playing with the future. The real work for
justice must be done in the present. This research reaffirms that such work is
necessary and that a successful product is possible.
Venezuelans are on their own now—without the day-‐to-‐day guidance and
leadership of Hugo Chávez. But the foundation that he provided to them was so
affirming, beginning with the Bolivarian Constitution, that circumstances have been
arranged to withstand the current instability being orchestrated from outside. Also,
the people are stronger knowing that they produced the Caracazo and Hugo Chávez
and that they can withstand the hardships imposed by those unfriendly to their
liberation and that yet another revolutionary, transformational, Parrhesiastes, like
Hugo Chávez, already resides among them.
238
Appendix A: Review of Literature Search Strategy
First of all, let me share the results of EBSCO searches using all of the
databases available to Antioch University on the intersection of Hugo Chávez and
the various placeholders for race that I found in the literature:
1. Ethnic Diversity -‐ 1 including academic journals (1)
2. Social Justice -‐ 33 citations including academic journals (7), newspapers
(14), magazines (18), books (4), and e-‐books (4)
3. Multiculturalism -‐ 3 citations including e-‐books (1), academic journals (1),
reviews (1)
4. Negritude -‐ 0
5. Embedded Racism -‐ 0
6. Whiteness/Whiteness Race Identity -‐ 0
7. Blackness -‐ 0
8. Critical Theory -‐ 2 citations including newspapers (2) and ERIC database (1)
9. Postcolonialism/postcolonial analysis -‐ 0
10. Postsecularism -‐ 0
11. Subaltern -‐ 2 citations including conferences (1) and academic journals (1)
12. Internal Colonialism -‐ 0
13. Critical Race Theory -‐ 0
14. Latino Critical Race Theory (LatCrit) -‐0
15. Latino Critical Theory (LatCrit) -‐ 0
16. Other -‐ 73 citations (2013) but this includes the word “other” when it is NOT
used to indicate an identity including magazines (21), academic journals
(18), newspapers (17), trade publications (5), and reports (1)
17. Endoracismo/Internalized Racism -‐ 0
18. Race/race and politics -‐ 133 citations before eliminating duplicates,
including newspapers (63), magazines (55), academic journals (28), books
(7), ebooks (6); 49 citations after duplicates eliminated
239
Because of the relative lack of specific literature from the combined search terms of
“Hugo ” and “Critical Race Theory,” another literature search strategy was effected
in order to obtain the depth and breadth needed. In this section, I was guided by
Maxwell’s maxim of relevance not exhaustion. I accomplished this by restricting the
time frame of this Literature Review. In order to know who is currently writing on
the subject, I restricted this Literature Review to articles published in 2013 unless
the article is considered as foundational as the books that have already been
reviewed. With this limiter, the following results were obtained for peer-‐reviewed
articles:
1. Ethnic Diversity -‐ 0 2. Social Justice -‐ 0 3. Multiculturalism -‐ 0 4. Negritude -‐ 0 5. Embedded Racism -‐ 0 6. Whiteness/Whiteness Race Identity -‐ 0 7. Blackness -‐ 0 8. Critical Theory -‐ 1 (By Mike Cole) 9. Postcolonialism/postcolonial analysis -‐ 0 10. Postsecularism – 0 11. Subaltern -‐ 0 12. Internal Colonialism -‐ 0 13. Critical Race Theory -‐ 0 14. Latino Critical Race Theory (LatCrit) -‐ 0 15. Latino Critical Theory (LatCrit) -‐ 0 16. Other -‐ 5 17. Endoracismo/Internalized Racism -‐ 0 18. Race/race and politics -‐ 0
240
Appendix B: Participant Information
In all, there were twenty-‐five Participants. Following are their profiles:
1. Venezuelan Woman #1: A feminist cartoonist. 2. Venezuelan Woman #2, Ph.D.: Professor of Sociology. 3. Venezuelan Woman #3, Ph.D.: Professor of Communications. 4. Venezuelan Woman #4, Ph.D.: Professor of Anthropology. 5. Venezuelan Man #1: Afro-‐Descendant 6. Venezuelan Man #2: Afro-‐Descendant, serving as Ambassador at the time of
this writing 7. Cuban Woman, Graciela Chailloux, Ph.D.: Professor at the University of
Havana and author of Subjects or Citizens: British Caribbean Workers in Cuba: 1900 – 1960.
8. Haitian-‐American Woman Jeanette Charles: Scholar doing research at the Bolivarian University of Venezuela, Charles is a recent graduate of Scripps College and 2010 Thomas J. Watson Fellow.
9. USA Afro-‐Descendant Activist Larry Pinkney: A founding member of the Black Panther Party, a 1960s revolutionary social movement that worked in Black neighborhoods in the U.S. to protect that community from police brutality.
10. USA Afro-‐Descendant Professor, Lewis Gordon, Ph.D.: Currently professor of Africana Philosophy in the African American Studies Department at the University of Connecticut. Expert on Frantz Fanon and author of Fanon: A Critical Reader.
11. USA Professor, George Ciccariello-‐Maher, Ph.D.: Author of We Created Chávez: A People’s History of the Venezuelan Revolution and Assistant Professor of History and Politics at Drexel University.
12. USA Afro-‐Descendant Professor, Molefi Asante, Ph.D.: Currently Chair of the African American Studies Department at Temple University.
13. USA Afro-‐Descendant Professor, Ray Winbush, Ph.D.: Director of the Institute of Urban Research at Morgan State University, an institution with the designation of “Historically Black College or University (HBCU) and author of Belinda’s Petition: A Concise History of Reparations for the Trans-‐Atlantic Slave Trade.
14. Donald H. Smith, Ph.D.: Professor Emeritus of Education at Baruch College; served as Chair of the New York City Board of Education Commission on Students of African Descent and as President of the National Alliance of Black School Educators.
15. Jeffrey B. Perry, Ph.D.: An independent scholar who focuses on the centrality of the struggle against White supremacy to progressive social
241
change. According to Dr. Perry, “white skin privileges” are not in the interests of working-‐class European Americans. He believes that these privileges are a “poison bait” that are like a “shot of heroin” to European American workers and they should be opposed. He adds that the system of white race privileges was invented and is maintained by the ruling class and it serves the interests of the ruling class.
16. James Early: Director of Cultural Studies and Communications at the Center for Folklife Programs and Cultural Studies at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. Knew Hugo Chávez and appeared on his television program, Alo Presidente, several times.
17. Askia Muhammad: Senior Editor at The Final Call Newspaper, a publication founded by Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam and reports from Washington, D.C.
18. Al Giordano: Founder of the Authentic School of Journalism where Evo Morales, President of Bolivia, and his current Vice President, once participated. Also founded Narconews.com
19. Wayne Madsen: An investigative journalist whose beat comprises his former employers, Naval Intelligence and the National Security Agency.
20. Akinyele Umoja, Ph.D.: Afro-‐Descendant Chair of the African American Studies Department at Georgia State University and author of We Will Shoot Back: Armed Resistance in the Mississippi Freedom Movement. Also active with Malcolm X Grassroots Movement. Panel Participant.
21. Cynthia Hewitt, Ph.D.: Afro-‐Descendant Sociologist who teaches at Morehouse College and is active with the All African People’s Revolutionary Party (AAPRP), an organization founded by Kwame Nkrumah and popularized during the U.S. Civil Rights Era by Stokely Carmichael (also known as Kwame Turé). Panel Participant.
22. David Josué: Afro-‐Descendant. Haitian, now living in the U.S.; Active on African, Haitian, and Caribbean Issues. Traveled to Brazil to ask that country to remove its troops of occupation from Haiti. Panel Participant.
23. Sobukwe Shakura: Afro-‐Descendant. Veteran community leader with over thirty years’ experience with the AAPRP. Panel Participant.
24. Reverend P.D. Menelik Harris: Afro-‐Descendant. Jamaican, now living in the U.S. Secretary General of the World African Diaspora Union (WADU). Panel Participant.
25. Kofi Adjei: Afro-‐Descendant. Ghanaian now living in the U.S. Co-‐Chair of the Georgia Chapter of WADU. Panel Participant.
242
Appendix C: Interview Excerpt Venezuelan Woman #2
i) Venezuelan Woman # 2 tells her story
Venezuelan Woman #2 testified on the personal impact of Chávez’s
leadership on her life. She told me her personal story, although, she says, she prefers
not to talk about her own story. Here is her story:
After completing her undergraduate degree in Venezuela, she wanted to
study “women in development and education” on the graduate level, but
the resources of feminist literature were just not there in Venezuela. She
made a decision to pursue her advanced degrees in the United States. This
sparked grave disagreement from her husband at the time and a bitter
divorce ensued. She was a mother of three—so her family was put on the
line by her decision to pursue higher education. She began to research her
rights as a Venezuelan woman and mother of three and soon found herself
saying, “I have no place in my own society.” She discovered that as a
Venezuelan woman, she had no right to divorce her husband; She adds, “At
least there was the civil rights movement in the U.S. which gave women
the right to fight for their rights.” She says that she found herself saying, “I
want to be a scholar; I am intelligent; I don’t need a man to tell me ‘You
can’t do this.’” As a part of her struggle with her husband, She discovered
that she was smart, intelligent, that she could produce, and that she could
make a contribution in her field of study; she did not want any man to tell
her, “No, I want you to be my wife; you don’t need to work.” She continued
that she is not a “trophy.” Her parents did not want her to divorce her
husband and have a career. She even went to the United Nations to
interview a Venezuelan feminist who gave her important information, not
only for her studies, but also about herself and her role in society as a
woman. What she learned about the rights of Venezuelan women was that
she had no rights. No right to leave her husband. No right to say I want to
study. No Constitution gave her her rights like women had in the United
243
States. By law, she could not say I want to study; I do not want to go back
to Venezuela. If she refused to follow her husband, she would lose the
custody of her children—and she did. This is the personal thing that she
never talked about. By the time she was at Penn State University, she was
close to getting her Ph.D., her husband withdrew all financial support for
her; her mother took away her inheritance; she lost custody of her
children all because as a woman she had no rights in
Venezuela. Venezuelan Woman #2 says that she loves her field, she
wanted to be a college professor, and she wanted to be a researcher. Yet, in
the Venezuelan Constitution this desire for a place in society cost her her
marriage and her children. At this point, according to Venezuelan Woman
#2, “Venezuela was a country that died for me.” Her husband made the
case before the Court that she chose her career over her children. He won
everything and she lost everything. “I became a poor woman with all of
this education and a struggling woman and there are still lingering things
from my past. Even when the Caracazo took place, I didn’t care. Then, into
the political life of Venezuela comes Chávez and his proposal for a new
Constitution: the Bolivarian Constitution.
She says that it was Hugo Chávez who “opened her eyes when he
changed the Constitution.” He gave the Venezuelan people the right to be
human and the right to have rights—real rights. What the opposition is
doing to Presidential Maduro is based on Constitution rights. I grew up in a
society where I did not have the right to protest my government. I did
begin to pay attention to what he was doing. She wasn’t comfortable
having a military leader, but her curiosity led her to explore more of his
policies—although she was still living in the United States.
Liberal Democracy in Venezuela meant no participation. Only the
right to go to vote. We had no voice. It was Hugo Chávez who changed
that. And that is why I admire Hugo Chávez as a leader. He has been
misunderstood, many people in the Western world don’t understand that
people have the right to be free and to fight for their ideals and Hugo
244
Chávez brought that to Venezuela. He was loved in Venezuela. He was
proud to be Venezuelan. She did not go back to Venezuela until her mother
passed and she said that it was a Venezuela, prior to the arrival of Chávez,
that she did not recognize: “Burger King and McDonald’s restaurants
everywhere. It was like New York.”
Chávez also understood that neoliberalism and capitalism work for
some but not for most. When you have a marginalized majority,
individualism doesn’t work. Chávez understood that these were cultural,
economic and political values that were important to
Venezuela. Venezuela needed continuity; it was not that Chávez wanted to
be in power forever. He understood that continuity in terms of policy was
very important. Every five years, Venezuela had had a new government
with new policies and ‘there was never a continuity in terms of social
policies.” To eliminate the profound inequality in the society, capitalism
was not the way to go. Chávez understood that that was his role as a
leader.
Even here, they don’t believe that I like Chávez. They don’t
understand that there are personal reasons why people tend to like a
leader. President Chávez gave full support to Nora Casteneda and her
organization BanMujer (bank for the development of women). I believe
that he understood in his way women’s liberation because he had
daughters and he loved his mother.
245
Appendix D: The Idea of the Deep State and the Killing of Lumumba
The idea of “The Deep State” has been popularized by Peter Dale Scott,
Professor Emeritus of the flagship campus of the University of California, Berkeley.
“The Deep State” is revealed to onlookers by way of “Deep Events” that arise from
the practice of “Deep Politics.” A “Deep Event” is an event about which
governmental authorities want the public to know little, nothing, or only its
unenlightening, but tailor-‐made explanation. It is Professor Scott who has given us
the appropriate language to characterize and define these phenomena. Deep
Politics, according to Dr. Scott, describes the way the United States is managed in
order to maintain the existing distribution of wealth and to limit the possibility of
democratic resistance. According to Scott, Deep Politics is the part of government
policy and practice that intentionally suppresses or that contains deceptive
information about government activities. Therefore, perception management
techniques are used by the State alongside its practice of Deep Politics. Thus, the
Deep State consists of the secret politics of a state and the actors who carry out
those politics. Deep State actors carry out violent and non-‐violent
policies. Recognizing the existence and practices of The Deep State are critical to
understanding, not only the importance of resistance, but also how to effectively
resist. Therefore, it is critical to understand and not be fooled when the Deep State
utilizes familiar pro-‐democracy, non-‐violent action and strategies to further its
own ends against independent democratic states and the people’s right of
democratic expression and self-‐determination. President Eisenhower’s approval of
the assassination of Congolese Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba is one example of
246
the Deep State. It took the United States 19 years to officially admit its role in the
murder of Lumumba when it finally did so in December 2013.400
U.S. Officially Admits Eisenhower Approval of Patrice Lumumba’s Murder
The Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with
Respect to Intelligence Activities (The Church Committee) did not confine itself to
domestic matters; it also issued an interim report on U.S.-‐inspired assassination
plots “involving foreign leaders.”401 Alleged assassination plots against Fidel Castro
and Patrice Lumumba are discussed by the Church Committee. With reference to
Patrice Lumumba, the Committee’s work was inconclusive on U.S. involvement in
the eventual murder of Lumumba. The Committee did find that CIA Chief Allen
Dulles signed a cable to the Leopoldville (Kinshasa) Station Officer stating: “We
conclude that his [Lumumba’s] removal must be an urgent and prime objective and
that under existing conditions this should be a high priority of our covert
action.”402 The Dulles cable also authorized the expenditure in Congo of $100,000
without additional or prior consultation with Headquarters.
However, it was the U.S. State Department Historian that published
unequivocal U.S. actions involving Lumumba’s murder that the U.S. Government had
sought to deny. The operation of the U.S. Deep State with regard to the Lumumba
400. Department of State Office of The Historian, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964 – 1968, Volume XXIII Congo, 1960-‐1968, p. 1, http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-‐68v23. 401. Church Committee Interim Report: Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders, http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/contents/church/ contents_church_reports_ir.htm. 402. Church Committee Interim Report, p. 15, http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/ church /reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0015a.htm.
247
assassination finally was revealed. Moreover, after a two-‐decade delay, the
Department of State Office of The Historian released the Foreign Relations of the
United States 1964-‐1968 just before Christmas in December 2013 after beginning its
review in 1994. This important and delayed volume addressed the formerly omitted
Eisenhower authorization to assassinate Patrice Lumumba. The Historian wrote: “At
the same time, based on authorization from President Eisenhower's statements at
an NSC meeting on August 18, 1960, discussions began to develop highly sensitive,
tightly-‐ held plans to assassinate Lumumba.”403
403. U.S. Department of State Office of The Historian, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXIII Congo, 1960–1968, p. 1, http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-‐68v23.
248
Appendix E: Legacy of Covert Action Faced by Chávez
A significant question in assessing the leadership and struggles of Hugo
Chávez surrounds the extent to which intentional subversion supported by the
United States took place. This appendix describes several public and/or declassified
documents that substantiate this subversion.
i) CANVAS/STRATFOR
No one denies that the organization the Serbian-‐based Center for Non Violent
Action and Strategies (CANVAS) undertook analysis –if not more—aimed at
searching for the weak spots in the Chávez Bolivarian regime. The draft assessment
prepared by CANVAS is discussed at venezuelanalysis.com404 and by Eva
Golinger.405
Interestingly, however, the draft report online –and there is no “final report”
that has been uploaded in the five years since its preparation –is not addressed to
any specific audience, despite its thoroughness and the high likelihood that
preparing it came at significant costs. Instead, the document awkwardly and vaguely
explains that its “goal is to provide basis for more detailed planning potentially
performed by interested performers and CANVAS.”
Who might these “performers” be?
Not long after the CANVAS draft report was prepared, critical journalism took
its analysis beyond what is possible for this dissertation.406 Several such reports
404. See http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/5139. 405. See http://www.chavezcode.com/2010/02/colored-‐revolutions-‐new-‐form-‐of-‐regime.html. 406. See my Preface and comments about the use of WikiLeaks as data in the fourth chapter.
249
suggest that CANVAS colluded with a Stratfor, a “private” research firm in the United
States, to probe the vulnerabilities of Chávez and his government, including on how
to stir up and organize opposition in hopes of regime change.407
The example in this appendix not only supports this but indicates the rich
and vital political analysis awaiting scholarship who are able to, or willing to take
the risks of using restricted government documents as a data source for
understanding United States interventions in the domestic politics of regimes it does
not approve of.
ii) Family Jewels
The “Family Jewels” were a set of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
documents, released by the CIA in June 2007 and that confirmed the Agency ‘s
violation of its Charter, including illegal domestic activities, warrantless
wiretapping, and assassination. These documents were released after journalist
Seymour Hersh broke the story that the CIA was operating domestically in violation
of its Charter.408 The documents long preceded the accession to power of Hugo
Chávez yet are interesting because of the unhesitant use they reveal of subterfuge
against foreign leaders whose approaches were not seen as favorable to the United
407. See the Pravda’s online report, “WikiLeaks Evidence that the U.S. Planned to Overthrow President Chavez,” Pravda.ru, trans. Lisa Karpova, February 26, 2013, http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/26-‐02-‐2013/123897 usa_overthrow_chavez-‐0/. 408. Seymour M. Hersh. “Huge C.I.A. Operation Reported in U.S. Against Anti-‐War Forces, Other Dissidents in Nixon Years,” New York Times, December 22, 1974. http://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1974/12/22/432151792.html?pageNumber=1.
250
States. These included Fidel Castro and Patrice Lumumba. The complete document
is available for download.409
iii) Operation Condor
Operation Condor was a massive and covert operation developed by right-‐
wing Latin American dictatorships with the full knowledge and, often, support of the
United States. Conducted from 1974 to, 1990s, this also preceded Hugo Chávez’s rise
to power and so pertained mostly to such nations as Argentina, Brazil Chile, and
Paraguay.
Formally portrayed as an initiative of those nations, not the United States, in
fact the record shows deep even directive involvement of the U.S. Secretary of State
at the time, Henry Kissinger: in an exemplary instance he is recorded as conveying
through an aide to Argentinian generals, “If there are things that have to be done,
you should do them quickly.”410 Again, however, understanding Operation Condor
helps to reveal the extent to which the United States was willing to go to support
repression by its client dictators and, of course, the U.S.-‐based multinationals who
409. Links to the full report and searchable full text can be found on: National Security Archive, “The CIA’s Family Jewels,” June 21, 2007, http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB222/. 410. Operation Condor telecom notes of Kissinger to Latin American aide Henry Schlaudeman, June 30, 1976, reproduced in Marianne Schlotterbeck “Operation Condor Declassified: A Case Study in International Terrorism,” PowerPoint presentation, Pier Summer Institute, July 2009, https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yale.edu%2Fmacmillan%2Flais%2Fresources%2FSchlotterbeckPIEROperationCondor.ppt&ei=g-‐pLVe65EqqxsASZ8YHQBA&usg=AFQjCNGq_k1bEEHZE5k-‐lSzdBcVCkv4Ytw&bvm=bv.92765956,d.cWc.
251
operated collaboratively within such dictatorships.411 In the words of one scholar
who has extensively examined Operation Condor, “The Condor apparatus was a
secret component of a larger U.S.-‐led counterinsurgency strategy to preempt or
reverse social movements demanding political or socioeconomic change.”412
411. National Security Archive, “OPERATION CONDOR: National Security Archive Presents Trove of Declassified Documentation in Historic Trial in Argentina,” http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB514/. 412. J. Patrice McSherry, Predatory States: Operation Condor and Covert War in Latin America (Lanham, MD: Rowland & Littlefield, 2005), 1.
252
Appendix F: Permissions and Exemptions (for Main Body of Dissertation)
The following is a list of images used in the main body of this dissertation indicating copyright status/permissions on subsequent pages.
Page in Text
Item Status Pg. in Appendix
ii Photo of mourners at Chávez funeral Permission of photographer 254 ii Photo of graffiti Photo by author 47 Fig. 2.1 Photos of Luzia skull
reconstruction Permission of Richard Neaves 255
186 Fig. 5.1 Photo of Aristóbulo Istúriz Creative Commons Attribution-‐NonCommercial-‐ShareAlike 2.0 Licence.
256
186 Fig. 5.2 Photo of Jaua & Putin Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License
257
255
RE FIGURE 5.1 ARISTOBULO ISTURIZ – PER FLICKR
Photograph is from Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lubrio/2375776015/ in/photolist-‐5Exrre-‐9rFBMB-‐4BWtrr-‐7xPj41) Taken by Luigini Bracci on March 29, 2008.
Photo was cropped for use here primarily to exclude placard name for the adjacent delegate which could be confusing in text. Rights reserved description linked to this page is as follows:
256
RE Figure 5.2. Chávez’s Vice-‐President, Elias Jaua/ Russia’s President Vladimir Putin
This image is from the website of the Russian Government (http://archive.government.ru/eng/docs/17334/) accompanied by the title “Prime Minister Vladimir Putin meets with Vice President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Elías Jaua Milano”.
Use of the website is designated as follows:
257
Bibliography
Abbott, Andrew. Chaos of Disciplines.Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001. Abdul Jalil, Mustafa. Video, speaking on television (in Arabic). May 31, 2014. Libyan
Free Press. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jjf5MTKHbqw.
Abowitz, Kathleen Knight. “A Pragmatist Revisioning of Resistance Theory.” American Educational Research Journal 37, no. 4 (2000): 877–907. doi: 10.3102/00028312037004877.
Allen, Theodore W. The Invention of the White Race: The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-‐America. London: Verso, 1997.
———. “White Supremacy in U.S. History.” Speech at the Guardian Forum, April 28, 1973. http://www.sojournertruth.net/whitesupremushist.html.
Alvarez Tabio, Pedro, ed. The Fascist Coup Against Venezuela: “The Life of the Homeland is at Stake Here” Hugo Chávez Frias President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Speeches and Addresses December 2002–January 2003. 2nd ed. Havana: Ediciones Plaza, 2003.
Alvesson, Mats, and Jorgen Sandberg, “Generating Research Questions through Problematization.” Academy of Management Review 36, no. 2 (2011): 247–271. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2011.59330882.
Amin, Samir. Eurocentrism: Modernity, Religion, and Democracy: A Critique of Eurocentrism and Culture. Translated by Russell Moore and James Membrez, 2nd ed. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2009.
Angeleri, Sandra. “Ponencia_Coro.” Unpublished Paper, 2014.
Araque, Ali Rodriguez. “Remarks at the United Nations.” September 12, 2005. Accessed May 12, 2014. http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/ga/summit2005/ worldsummit050914am.rm?start=%2204:57:28%22&end=%2205:01:07%22
Africa South America Summit. http://asasummit.itamaraty.gov.br/.
Asante, Molefi. Afrocentricity: The Theory of Social Change. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press, 1990.
Assensoh, A.B. African Political Leadership. Malabar, FL: Krieger, 1998.
Azad, Samina. “Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man and Postcolonialism.” International Journal of Social Sciences & Education 3, no. 2 (2013): 413–421.
258
Baburkin, Sergei, Andres C. Danopoulos, Rita Ciacalone, and Erika Moreno. “The 1992 Coup Attempts in Venezuela: Causes and Failure.” Journal of Political and Military Sociology 27, no. 1 (Summer): 141–154.
Barrueto, Jorge J. “A Latin American Indian Re-‐Reads the Canon: Postcolonial Mimicry in El Senor Presidente.” Hispanic Review (Summer 2004): 339–356.
Bass, Bernard M. “Two Decades of Research and Development in Transformational Leadership.” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8, no. 1 (1999): 9–32. doi: 10.1080/135943299398410.
———. Bruce Avolio, and Laurie Goodheim. “Biography and the Assessment of Transformational Leadership at the World-‐Class Level.” Journal of Management 13, no. 1 (1987): 7–19. doi: 10.1177/014920638701300102.
Bell, Derrick. Faces at the Bottom of the Well. New York: Basic, 1992.
Bhabha, Homi K. "Framing Fanon." Foreword, in The Wretched of the Earth. By Frantz Fanon. Translated by Richard Philcox. New York: Grove Press, 2005.
———.“Of Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse.” October 28, (Spring 1984): 125–133. doi: 0.2307/778467.
Blackstock, Nelson. COINTELPRO: The FBI’s Secret War on Political Freedom. New York: Vintage, 1976.
Blum, William. “Trojan Horse: The National Endowment for Democracy.” http://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-‐state/trojan-‐horse-‐the-‐national-‐endowment-‐for-‐democracy.
Bonilla-‐Silva, Eduardo. Racism without Racists: Color-‐Blind Racism and the Persistence of Inequality in America, 4th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014.
Bono, Joyce, and Marc Anderson. “The Advice and Influence Networks of Transformational Leaders.” Journal of Applied Psychology 90, no. 6 (2005): 1306–1314. doi: 10.1037/0021-‐9010.90.6.1306.
Boote, David N., and Penny Beile. “Scholars Before Researchers: On the Centrality of the Dissertation Literature Review in Research Preparation.” Educational Researcher 34, no. 3 (2005): 3–15. doi: 10.3102/0013189X034006003.
Bourne, Richard. “Che Guevera, Marxist Architect of Revolution.” The Guardian, October 10, 1967. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/19/che-‐guevara-‐obituary-‐guardian-‐archive.
259
Boyce Davies, Carole. Encyclopedia of the African Diaspora: Origins, Experiences, and Culture. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-‐CLIO, 2008.
Boykoff, Jules. “Devil or Democrat? Hugo and the US Prestige Press.” New Political Science 31, no. 1 (2009): 3–26. doi: 10.1080/07393140802693832
Bracho Reyes, José. Chimbanguele: Paradigma del Cimarronaje Cultural en Venezuela. Caracas: Consejo Nacional de la Cultura, 2005.
Braun, Bruce. “On the Raggedy Edge of Risk: Articulations of Race and Nature After Biology.” In Race, Nature, and the Politics of Difference, edited by Donald S. Moore, Jake Kosek, and Anand Pandian, 175–203. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2003.
Brincat, Shannon. “The Harm Principle and Recognition Theory: On the Complementarity between Linklater, Honneth and the Prospect of Emancipation.” Critical Horizons 14, no. 2 (2013): 225–256. doi: 10.1179/1440991713Z.0000000001.
Burgess, Glenn. “On Hobbesian Resistance Theory.” Political Studies 42, no. 1 (1994): 62–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-‐9248.1994.tb01674.x.
Burns, James MacGregor. Leadership. New York: Harper-‐Collins, 1978.
Bush, George H.W. “Memorandum of Conversation” dated March 3, 1989. http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/pdfs/memcons_telcons/ 1989-‐03-‐03-‐-‐Perez.pdf.
———. “Memorandum of Conversation.” Bush to Carlos Andres Perez, March 3 1989, http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/pdfs/memcons_telcons/1989-‐03-‐03-‐Perez.pdf.
Cabral, Amilcar. Revolution in Guinea: An African People’s Struggle. London: Stage One, 1969.
Cale, Paul P. “The United States Military Advisory Group in El Salvador, 1979–1992.” Small Wars Journal, www.smallwarsjournal.com/documents/cale.pdf.
Canache, Damarys. “From Bullets to Ballots: The Emergence of Popular Support for Hugo Chávez.” Latin American Politics and Society 44, no. 1 (2002): 69–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-‐2456.2002.tb00197.x.
Cannon, Barry. “Class/Race Polarisation in Venezuela and the Electoral Success of Hugo Chávez: A Break with the Past or the Song Remains the Same?” Third World Quarterly 29, no. 4 (2008): 731–748. doi: 10.1080/01436590802075020.
260
———. “Venezuela, April 2002: Coup or Popular Rebellion? The Myth of a United Venezuela,” Bulletin of Latin American Research 23, no.3 (2004): 285–302. doi: 10.1111/j.0261-‐3050.2004.00109.x.
Carney, Judith A., and Richard Nicolas Rosomoff. In the Shadow of Slavery: Africa’s Botanical Legacy in the Atlantic World. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010.
Castro, Fidel. “Fidel Castro: “We Shall Defend Angola and Africa!” The Militant 78, no. 45. Last modified December 15, 2014. http://www.themilitant.com/2014/7845/784549.html.
———. “Haiti’s Lesson.” Cubadebate. January 14, 2010. http://en.cubadebate.cu/reflections-‐fidel/2010/01/14/haitis-‐lesson/.
Chailloux, Graciela. “The Black Jacobins, Teachers of Revolution.” Caminos 48, (2008), http://www.walterlippmann.com/docs2352.html.
Chávez, Hugo.The Fascist Coup Against Venezuela: “The Life of the Homeland is at Stake Here.” 2nd ed. Havana: Ediciones Plaza, 2003.
———. PetroCaribe, Towards a New Order in Our America. Caracas: La Imprenta Nacional, Coleccion Discursos, 2008.
———. Speech of Unity, December 15, 2006. Caracas: Socialism of the XXI Century Publications, 2007.
———. With ALBA, Peoples Awaken: Words of the Present Hugo Chávez FrÍas. Opening of the VI Presidential Summit of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA). Caracas: La Imprenta Nacional, Colleccion Discursos, 2008.
Chávez, Minerva S. “Autoethnography, a Chicana’s Methodological Research Tool: The Role of Storytelling for Those Who Have No Choice but to Do Critical Race Theory.” Equity and Excellence in Education 45, no. 2 (2012): 342–343. doi: 10.1080/10665684.2012.669196.
Chomsky, Noam. Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2003.
———. Paul Farmer, and Amy Goodman. Getting Haiti Right This Time: The U.S. and the Coup. Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press, 2004.
Churchill, Ward, and Jim Vander Wall. The COINTELPRO Papers: Documents from the FBI’s Secret Wars against Domestic Dissent. Boston: South End Press, 1990.
261
Ciccariello-‐Maher, George. “Toward a Racial Geography of Caracas: Neoliberal Urbanism and the Fear of Penetration.” Qui Parle 16, no. 2 (2007): 39–71.
———. We Created Chávez. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2013.
“C.L.R. James (West Indian Writer and Activist),”YouTube video, 6:38, posted by “Afrikanliberation," July 22, 2009, https://www.y.com/watch?v=viwYx3uIYiU.
Council on Hemispheric Affairs. “The South American Defense Council, UNASUR, the Latin American Military and the Region’s Political Process.” Council on Hemispheric Affairs, October 1, 2008. http://www.coha.org/the-‐south-‐american-‐defense-‐council-‐unasur-‐the-‐latin-‐american-‐military-‐and-‐the-‐region’s-‐political-‐process/.
———. “Venezuela’s Candidacy for the UN Security Council Appears on Track.” Council on Hemispheric Affairs, August 10, 2006. http://www.coha.org/venezuela’s-‐candidacy-‐for-‐the-‐un-‐security-‐council-‐appears-‐on-‐track/.
Cole, Nicholas. "Hugo Chávez and President Bush's Credibility Gap: The Struggle against US Democracy Promotion." International Political Science Review 28, no. 4 (2007): 493–507. doi: 10.1177/0192512107079637.
“Colombia Refuses to Join Regional Defense Council.” Colombia Reports, May 24, 2008. http://colombiareports.co/colombia-‐refuses-‐to-‐join-‐south-‐american-‐defense-‐council/.
Comfort, Nathaniel. “When Your Sources Talk Back: Toward a Multimodal Approach to Scientific Biography.” Journal of History of Biology 44, no. 4 (2011): 651–659. doi: 10.1007/s10739-‐011-‐9273-‐9.
Conger, Jay A., and Rabindra N. Kanungo. “Charismatic Leadership in Organizations: Perceived Behavioral Attributes and Their Measurement.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 15 (1994): 439–452. doi: 10.1002/job.4030150508.
Corrales, Javier. “Hugo Boss.” Foreign Policy 152 (2006): 32–40.
———. “Hugo Chávez Plays Simon Says: Democracy without Opposition in Venezuela.” Hopscotch: A Cultural Review 2, no. 2 (2000): 38–49.
———. “Hugo’s Hubris.” Wilson Quarterly 35, no. 3 (2011): 10–11.
Crespilho Lourenço, Fabiano. “El Silencio Academico Sobre El Banco Del Sur.” Problemas del Desarollo: Revista Latinoamerica Economia 41, no. 160 (2010): 135–155. http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S0301-‐70362010000100007&script=sci_arttext.
262
Cummings, André Douglas Pond. “Derrick Bell: Godfather Provocateur.” Harvard Journal on Racial and Ethnic Justice 28 (2012): 51–66.
Cunningham, David. “The Patterning of Repression: FBI Counterintelligence and the New Left.” Social Forces 82, no. 1 (2003): 209–240. doi: 10.1353/sof.2003.0079.
Curry, Tommy. “Concerning the Underspecialization of Race Theory in American Philosophy: How the Exclusion of Black Sources Affects the Field.” The Pluralist 5, no. 1 (2010): 44–64. doi: 10.1353/plu.0.0042.
“The Daily Dot Reveals Extent of FBI Involvement in Stratfor Hack,” PRNewswire, June 5, 2014. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-‐releases/the-‐daily-‐dot-‐reveals-‐extent-‐of-‐fbi-‐involvement-‐in-‐stratfor-‐hack-‐261961141.html.
“Dancing Punta – Music Video – Nuru.” YouTube video, 5:14. Posted by “goastafa.” September 14, 2007. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynVPIod9lE8.
Davies, Carole Boyce. Encyclopedia of the African Diaspora: Origins, Experiences, and Culture. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-‐CLIO, 2008.
Davis, Angela. Are Prisons Obsolete? Toronto: Publishers Group Open Media, 2003.
Dawsey, James M. “Liberation Theology and Economic Development.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 60, no. 5 (2001): 203–212. doi: 10.1111/1536-‐7150.00145.
de Miguel, Veronique. “Hugo Chávez’s Women: The Ex Wives and Mistresses Who Loved Venezuela’s Ailing President.” Huffington Post Latino Voices, January 11, 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/11/ hugo-‐Chávezs-‐women-‐the-‐ex_n_2455974.html.
Denhardt, Janet V., and Kelly B. Campbell. “The Role of Democratic Values in Transformational Leadership.” Administration & Society 38, no. 5 (2006): 556–572. doi: 10.1177/0095399706289714.
Dietz, Henry A., and David J. Myers. “From Thaw to Deluge: Party System Collapse in Venezuela and Peru.” Latin American Politics and Society 49, no. 2 (2008): 59–86. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-‐2456.2007.tb00407.x.
“Don’t F*ck with the M*rigold, B*tches,” BoRev.net, November 11, 2007. http://www.borev.net/2007/11/dont_fck_with_the_mrigold_btch.html.
Eisen, Arlene. “United Nations, UNICEF Praise Venezuelan Equality As Government Takes on Steep Housing Goals.” venezuelanalysis.com, May 9, 2014. http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/10672.
263
Ellner, Steve. “Social and Political Diversity and the Democratic Road to Change in Venezuela.” Latin American Perspectives 40, no. 3 (2013): 63–82. doi: 10.1177/0094582X13476002.
Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to the United States. “Afro-‐Venezuelans and the Struggle Against Racism.” venezuelanalysis.com, April 29, 2011. http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/6159.
———.The Struggles and Achievements of Afro-‐Venezuelans. May, 2012. http://venezuela-‐us.org/live/wp-‐content/uploads/2009/08/05-‐10-‐2012-‐FS-‐Afro-‐Venezuelans1.pdf.
Essed, Philomena. “Intolerable Humiliations.” In Racism Postcolonialism Europe, edited by Graham Huggan and Ian Law, 131–147. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2009.
———. Understanding Everyday Racism: An Interdisciplinary Theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991.
———, and David Theo Goldberg. Race Critical Theories: Text and Context Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004.
“Everyday Racism at Workplace. How does it feel? (ERAW) European Union Lifelong Learning Programme.” http://www.ch-‐e.eu/en/details-‐european-‐projects/everyday-‐ racism-‐at-‐workplace-‐how-‐does-‐it-‐feel-‐eraw.html,.
“Ex Economic Hitman in Panama.” YouTube, 4:11. Posted by Alan Duke, October 8, 2009. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiQsmgaBkzw.
Fanon, Frantz. Black Skin, White Masks. Translated by Charles Lam Markmann. New York: Grove Park Press, 1967.
Faria, Hugo J. “Hugo Chávez Against the Backdrop of Venezuelan Economic and Political History.” The Independent Review 12, no. 4 (2008): 519–535. https://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_12_04_2_faria.pdf.
Feinberg, Richard. “The Threat Closer to Home: Hugo Chávez and the War Against America.” Foreign Affairs 88, no. 3 (May/June 2009): 177–178.
Ferguson, Sue. “Locking Out the Mother Corp: Nationalism and Popular Imaginings of Public Service Broadcasting in the Print News Media.” Canadian Journal of Communication 32, no. 2 (2007): 181–200.
Fiedler, Fred E., and Robert J. House. “Leadership Theory and Research: A Report of Progress.” In International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, edited by Cary L. Cooper and Ivan T. Robertson, 73–92. Toronto: Wiley.
264
Figueroa, Monica G. Moreno, and Megan Rivers Moore. “Beauty, Race, and Feminist Theory in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Feminist Theory 14, no. 2 (2013): 131–136. doi: 10.1177/1464700113483233.
Figueroa, Victor M. “The Bolivarian Government of Hugo Chávez: Democratic Alternative for Latin America?” Critical Sociology 32, no. 1 (2006): 187–211. doi: 10.1163/156916306776150322.
Food and Agricultural Organization. “Progress Is Proof That Hunger Can Be Eliminated.” FAO, June 16, 2013. http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/178065/icode/.
“Former World Bank President: Big Shift Coming.” YouTube video, 51:21. From an address by James D. Wolfensohn to Stanford University Graduate School of Business. Posted by Stanford University Graduate School of Business, January 29, 2010. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a0zhc1y_Ns&feature=youtu.be.
Foucault, Michel. Fearless Speech. Los Angeles: Semiotext, 2001.
———. “The Meaning and Evolution of the Word ‘Parrhesia’.” Accessed December 26, 2013. http://foucault.info/documents/Parrhesia/foucault.dt1. wordParrhesia.en.html.
Freedom House. Report on Venezuela Freedom of the Press 2012. http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-‐press/2012/venezuela#.U-‐4FK0h2Dol.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Heart. New York: Continuum International, 1997.
———. Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 30th Anniversary Edition. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2012.
Friedman, Thomas. “The First Law of Petropolitics.” Foreign Policy 154 (May/June 2006): 28–36.
Fuller, J. Bryan, Coleman E. P. Patterson, Kim Hester, and Donna Y. Stringer. “A Quantitative Review of Research on Charismatic Leadership.” Psychological Reports 78 (1996): 271–287. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1996.78.1.271.
Galeano, Eduardo. Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1973.
Garcia, Jesus Chucho. “A Maroon President Called Hugo Chávez.” America Latina en Movimiento, March 15, 2013. http://alainet.org/active/62495&lang=es.
265
Gilmore, Ruth Wilson. Golden Gulag: Prisons, Surplus, Crisis, and Opposition in Globalizing California. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007.
Go, Julian. “For a Postcolonial Sociology.” Theory & Society 42, no. 1 (2013): 25–55. doi: 10.1007/s11186-‐012-‐9184-‐6.
Goldberg, David Theo. The Threat of Race: Reflections on Racial Neoliberalism. Malden, MA: Wiley-‐Blackwell, 2009.
Golinger, Eva. Bush versus Chávez: Washington’s War on Venezuela. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2008.
Green, Daryl D., and Gary E. Robert, “Transformational Leadership in a Post-‐Modern World: The Presidential Election of Barack Obama.” Academy of Strategic Management Journal 11, no.1 (2012): 458–476.
Grele, Ronald J. “Review Essay: Oral History Theory by Lynn Abrams.” Oral History Review 38, no. 2 (2011): 357. doi: 10.1093/ohr/ohr059.
Grundy, Kenneth W. “World Politics.” World Politics 15, no. 3 (1963): 438–454.
Guevara, Aleida. Chávez: Venezuela and the New Latin America. Melbourne: Ocean Press, 2005.
Guevara, Che, “At the Afro-‐Asian Conference in Algeria.” In Che Guevara Reader, edited by David Deutschmann, 340–349. North Melbourne: Ocean Press, 2005.
Guevara, Rodrigo. “Otto Reich: Planificator del Golpe Mediatico contra Chávez,” IAR Noticias.com, June 21, 2004. http://iarnoticias.com/secciones/latinoamerica/0041_otto_reich_19jun04.html.
Guillemin, Marilys, and Lynn Gillam, “Ethics, Reflexivity, and ‘Ethically Important Moments’ in Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 10, no. 2 (2004): 261–280. doi: 10.1177/1077800403262360.
Gulbas, Lauren E. “Embodying Racism: Race, Rhinoplasty, and Self-‐Esteem in Venezuela.” Qualitative Health Research 23, no. 3 (2013): 326–335. doi: 10.1177/1049732312468335.
Gumusluoglu, Lale, and Arzu Ilsev. “Transformational Leadership and Organizational Innovation: The Roles of Internal and External Support for Innovation.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 26 (2009): 264–277. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-‐5885.2009.00657.x.
266
Hairston, T.W. “Continuing Inequity through Neoliberalism: The Conveyance of White Dominance in the Educational Policy Speeches of President Barack Obama.” Interchange 43 (2013): 229–244. doi: 10.1007/s10780-‐013-‐9180-‐4.
Hardcastle, Mary-‐Ann, Kim Usher, and Colin Holmes, “Carspecken’s Five-‐Stage Critical Qualitative Research Method: An Application to Nursing Research.” Qualitative Health Research 16, no. 1 (2006): 151–161. doi: 10.1177/1049732305283998.
Heck, Oscar. “This is one of the main reasons why I love Venezuela.” Aletho News, November 12, 2010. Accessed April 25, 2014. https://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/oscar-‐heck-‐this-‐is-‐one-‐of-‐the-‐main-‐reasons-‐why-‐i-‐love-‐venezuela-‐…/
Heifetz, Ronald Abadian, and Martin Linsky. Leadership on the Line: Staying Alive through the Dangers of Leading. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press, 2002.
Hernandez, Tanya Kateri. Racial Subordination in Latin America: The Role of the State, Customary Law, and the New Civil Rights Response. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Historia y Cultura Afrovenezolana, “El Cimarronaje” (blog). http://culturaafrovenezolana.blogspot.com/2009/03/el-‐cimarronaje.html.
Hodges, Norman E. “Neo-‐colonialism: The New Rape of Africa.” The Black Scholar (1972): 12–23.
Hotep, Uhuru. “African Centered Leadership-‐Followership: Foundational Principles, Precepts, and Essential Practices.” Journal of Pan African Studies 3, no. 6 (2010): 11–26.
“Hugo at the UN accuses the American Imperialism and the ‘devil’ Bush,” YouTube video, 26:11. Posted by “Bolivar,” February 18, 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdZbddxXohu.
“Hugo Chávez R I P Venezuela President Why Haiti Is Poor?” YouTube video, 6:21. Posted by Cynthia McKinney, May 22, 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fbeMKi51xc&feature=youtu.be.
Hunt, James G. (Jerry) and Jay A. Conger. “From Where We Sit: An Assessment of Transformational and Charismatic Leadership Research.” Leadership Quarterly 10, no. 3 (1999): 335–343.
Iacobelli, Teresa. “ ‘A Participant’s History?’: The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the Manipulation of Oral History.” Oral History Review 38, no. 2 (2011): 331–348. doi: 10.1093/ohr/ohr099.
267
“In Conversation with Stuart Hall.” YouTube video. 51:51. Interview with C.L.R. James. Posted by “susie2010ism.” April 19, 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gf0KUxgZfI.
International Republican Institute, Venezuela’s 1998 Presidential, Legislative, and Gubernmatorial Elections: Election Observation Report. Washington, DC: IRI, February 12, 1999.
Ishibashi, Jun. “Hacia una Apertura del Debate Sobre el Racismo en Venezuela: Exclusion y Inclusion Esteriotipada de Personas “Negras” en los Medios De Comunicacion,” In Politicas de identidades y diferencias sociales en tiempos de globalizacion, edited by Daniel Mato, 33–61. Caracas: FACES-‐UCV, 2003.
Ives,Kim, and Ansel Herz. "WikiLeaks Haiti: The Aristide Files." The Nation, August 5, 2011. http://www.thenation.com/article/162598/wikileaks-‐haiti-‐aristide-‐files#.
Jackson, Victoria Marie. Race and Politics in Venezuela. Self-‐published: Victoria Marie Jackson, 2014.
James, C.L.R. The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution. New York: Vintage Books, 1989.
James, Ian. “Chávez Boosts Heating Oil Program for U.S. Poor; Goes after Bush Again.” Washington Post, September 21, 2006. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-‐dyn/content/ article/ 2006/ 09/21/ AR2006092101163.html.
Javers, Eamon. “Stratfor’s Hacked Emails Expose Some Very Tangled Intelligence Gathering.” Business Insider, February 27, 2012. Accessed January 24, 2015. http://www.businessinsider.com/bi-‐stratfor-‐wikileaks-‐hacked-‐emails-‐2012-‐2.
Jessee, Erin. “The Limits of Oral History: Ethics and Methodology Amid Highly Politicized Research Settings.” Oral History Review 38, no. 2 (2011): 287–307, doi: 10.1093/ohr/ohr098.
Jordan, Jenna. “When Heads Roll: Assessing the Effectiveness of Leadership Decapitation.” Security Studies 18, no. 4 (2009): 719–755. doi: 10.1080/09636410903369068.
Justina, “WikiLeaks Impacts Venezuela, Exposes Traitor.” Daily Kos, December 14, 2010. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/12/14/923066/-‐WikiLeaks-‐Impacts-‐Venezuela-‐Exposes-‐Traitor.
268
King, Martin Luther, Jr., “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop” delivered April 3, 1968, Memphis, Tennessee. American Rhetoric Top 100 Speeches. http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkivebeentothemountaintop.htm.
Kitzberger, Philip. “Giro a la Izquierda, Populismo y Activismo Gubernamental en la Esfera Publica Mediatica in America Latina.” In Poder Politico Y Medios de Communicacion: De la Representacion Politica al Reality Show, edited by Bernardo Sorj, 61–100. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI, 2010.
Krauze, Enrique. “Saint.” Wilson Quarterly 33, no. 3 (2009): 81–82.
Kucera, Joshua. “What Is Hugo Chávez up to?” Wilson Quarterly 35, no. 2 (Spring 2011): 22–30.
Lander, Edgar. Interview by Paul Jay, “From Exile to Radicalization in Venezuela.” April 11, 2014. http://www.popularresistance.org/from-‐exile-‐to-‐radicalization-‐in-‐venezuela/
Lang, Donald L. “Transformational Leadership Is Not Charismatic Leadership: Philosophical Impoverishment in Leadership Continues.” Human Resource Development Quarterly 2, no. 4 (1991): 397–402. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.3920020412.
Lao-‐Montes, Agustin, Amilcar Sshabass, Matilde Ribeiro, and Sonia E. Alvarez. “Reconfigurations of Racism, Racial Politics/Policies and New Scenarios of Power: A Preliminary Research Agenda.” October 2008. http://www.umass.edu/stpec/pdfs/Reconfigurations%20of%20Racism.pdf.
Larson, Mary. “Steering Clear of the Rocks: A Look at the Current State of Oral History Ethics in the Digital Age.” Oral History Review 40, no. 1 (2013): 36–49. doi: 10.1093/ohr/oht028.
Leddy, George. “New Structures for Capital and Forms of Resistance.” Latin American Perspectives 40, no. 5 (2013): 5–13. doi: 10.1177/0094582X13497927.
Lennard, Natasha. “Manning’s Lawyer: She Didn’t Receive a Fair Trial.” Salon, March 27, 2014. http://www.salon.com/2014/03/27/ mannings_laywer_she_didnt_receive_a_fair_trial/.
“Letter from Hugo Chávez to Africa.” Pambazuka News 625, April 10, 2013. http://www.pambazuka.net/en/category/features/86934.
Levy, Amir. “Second-‐Order Planned Change: Definition and Conceptualization.” Organizational Dynamics 15 no.1 (1986). doi: 10.1016/0090-‐2616(86)90022-‐7.
269
“Lies Behind the ‘Humanitarian War’ in Libya.” YouTube video, 19:39. Posted by Don De Bar, October 27, 2011. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gJz45K4Q50.
Linklater, Andrew. “Process Sociology and International Relations.” Sociological Review no. s1 (2011): 48–64. doi.10.1111/j.1467-‐954X.2011.01978.x.
Lopez-‐Maya, Margarita. “Venezuela after the Caracazo: Forms of Protest in a Deinstitutionalized Context.” Bulletin of Latin American Research 21, no. 2 (2002): 199–218 doi: 10.1111/1470-‐9856.00040.
“Luis Posada Carriles: The Declassified Record, CIA and FBI Documents Detail Career in International Terrorism; Connection to U.S. National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 153.” The National Security Archive, May 10, 2005. http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB153/.
Luke, Timothy W. “Cabral’s Marxism: An African Strategy for Socialist Development.” Studies in Comparative Communism 14, no. 4 (1981): 307–330.
Lupu, Noam. “Who Votes for Chavismo? Class Voting in Hugo ’s Venezuela.” Latin American Research Review 45, no. 1 (2010): 7–32. doi: 10.1353/lar.0.0083.
Marcano, Christina, and Alberto Berrera Tyszka. Hugo Chávez: The Definitive Biography of Venezuela’s Controversial President. New York: Random House, 2006.
Martin, Jorge. “The Transition to Socialism in Venezuela: What Is to Be Done?” In Defence of Marxism, March 5, 2015. http://www.marxist.com/the-‐transition-‐to-‐socialism-‐in-‐venezuela-‐what-‐is-‐to-‐be-‐done.htm.
Martins, Pablo. “Confluencias entre el pensamiento de Frantz Fanon y el de Paulo Freire: El Surgimiento de la Educacion Popular en el Marco de la Situacion Colonial.” Educaçao 37, no. 2 (2012): 241–256. doi: 10.5902/198464443250.
Matin, Kamran. “Redeeming the Universal: Postcolonialism and the Inner Life of Eurocentrism.” European Journal of International Relations 19 (2013): 353–377. doi: 10.1177/1354066111425263.
Mato, Daniel. “Forms of Intercultural Collaboration between Institutions of Higher Education and Indigenous and Afro-‐Descendant Peoples in Latin America.” Journal of Postcolonial Studies 14, no. 3 (2011): 331–346. doi: 10.1080/13688790.2011.613104.
Maxwell, Joseph A. “Literature Reviews of, and for Educational Research: A Commentary on Boote and Beile’s ‘Scholars Before Researchers.’” Educational Researcher 35, no. 9 (2006): 28–31. doi: 10.3102/0013189X035009028.
270
Maxwell, Kenneth. “The Long Shadow of Hugo.” Foreign Affairs 79, no. 5 (Sep/Oct 2000): 118– 122.
McMillan, James, and John Wergin. Understanding and Evaluating Educational Research. Boston: Pearson, 2010.
Mendy, Peter Karibe. “Amilcar Cabral and the Liberation of Guinea-‐Bissau: Context, Challenges and Lessons for Effective African Leadership.” African Identities 4, no. 1 (2006): 7–21. doi: 10.1080/14725840500268440.
Mezirow, Jack. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-‐Bass, 1991.
Michael, Gabriel J. "Who's Afraid of WikiLeaks? Missed Opportunities in Political Science Research." Review of Policy Research 32, no. 2 (2015): 175–199. doi: 10.1111/ropr.12120.
Miller, David, and Greg Philo. “Silencing Dissent in Academia: The Commercialization of Science.” The Psychologist 15, no. 5 (2002): 244–246.
Mills, Albert J., Gabrielle Durepos, and Elden Wiebe, eds. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. Los Angeles: Sage, 2010.
Modi, Vikram. “Banco del Chávez: Undermining Liberal Capitalism.” Harvard International Review 29, no. 3 (October 1, 2007): 10–11. http://hir.harvard.edu/archives/1671.
Molina, Jose E., and Perez B. Carmen, “Radical Change at the Ballot Box: Causes and Consequences of Electoral Behavior in Venezuela’s 2000 Elections.” Latin American Politics and Society 46, no. 1 (2004): 103–134. doi: 10.1353/lap.2004.0008.
Montagu, Ashley. Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 1997.
Mookherji, Sangeeta, and Anne LaFond. “Strategies to Maximize Generalization from Multiple Case Studies: Lessons from the Africa Routine Immunization System Essentials (ARISE) Project.” Evaluation 19, no. 3 (2013): 284–303. doi: 10.1177/1356389013495212.
Moreno, Marco Aponte. “Metaphors in Hugo Chávez’s Political Discourse: Conceptualizing Nation, Revolution, and Opposition.” City University of New York, 2008.
Morgensen, Scott Lauria. “Destabilizing the Settler Academy: The Decolonial Effects of Indigenous Methodologies.” American Quarterly (2012): 805–808. doi: 10.1353/aq.2012.0050.
271
Muller, Fernando Suarez. “Eurocentrism, Human Rights, and Humanism.” International Journal of Applied Philosophy 26, no. 2 (2012): 279–293. doi: 10.5840/ijap201226221.
Naim, Moises. “A Venezuelan Paradox: How Latin America’s Sole Remaining Dictator Outsmarted the World’s Sole Remaining Superpower.” Foreign Policy 135 (March/April, 2003): 95–96.
Navarette, Maria Cristina. “El Cimarronaje, Una Alternativa de Libertad Para Los Esclavos Negros.” Revista Historia Caribe 2, no. 6 (2012): 90–98. Accessed April 9, 2014. http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=93720606.
Neves, Walter A., Mark Hubbe, and Luis Beethoven Pilo, “Early Holocene Human Skeletal Remains from Sumidouro Cave, Lagoa Santa, Brazil: History of Discoveries, Geological and Chronological Context, and Comparative Cranial Morphology.” Journal of Human Evolution 52, no. 1 (January 2007): 16–30. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2006.07.012.
Nichols, Elizabeth Gackstetter. “ ‘Decent Girls with Good Hair’: Beauty, Morality and Race in Venezuela.” Feminist Theory 14, no. 2 (2013): 171–185. doi: 10.1177/1464700113483243.
Nkrumah, Kwame. Consciencism: Philosophy and Ideology for Decolonization and Development with Particular Reference to the African Revolution. New York: Monthly Press, 1964.
———. Neo-‐colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1965.
Nzongola-‐Ntalaja, Georges. “Patrice Lumumba: The Most Important Assassination of the 20th Century: The US-‐sponsored Plot to Kill Patrice Lumumba, the Hero of Congolese Independence, Took Place 50 Years Ago Today.” The Guardian.com. http://www.theguardian.com/global-‐development/poverty-‐matters/2011/jan/17/patrice-‐lumumba-‐50th-‐anniversary-‐assassination.
Oakley, Ann. “The Social Science of Biographical Life-‐Writing: Some Methodological and Ethical Issues.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 13, no. 5 (2010): 425–439. doi: 10.1080/13645571003593583.
Pacto de Punto Fijo. Analitica, August 27, 2013. http://analitica.com/opinion/opinion-‐nacional/pacto-‐de-‐punto-‐fijo/.
Padgett, Tim. “Why Can’t Big Oil Match Hugo Chávez?” Time, January 7, 2009. http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1870219,00.html.
272
Paley, Dawn. “WikiLeaks Cables of Interest on Latin America, Released May 9-‐22, 2011.” Upside Down World, May 23, 2011. Accessed March 10, 2015. http://upsidedownworld.org/main/news-‐briefs-‐archives-‐68/3044-‐wikileaks-‐cables-‐of-‐interest-‐on-‐latin-‐america-‐released-‐may-‐9-‐22-‐2011.
Pearson, Tamara. “Africa-‐South America Summit in Venezuela Cements South-‐South Collaboration.” venezuelanalysis.com. Accessed February 19, 2014. http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/4822.
Perkins, John. Confessions of an Economic Hitman. San Francisco: Berrett-‐Koehler, 2004.
Perry, Jeffery B. “The Developing Conjuncture and Some Insights from Hubert Harrison and Theodore W. Allen on the Centrality of the Fight against White Supremacy.” Cultural Logic: Marxist Theory in Practice, 2010. http://clogic.eserver.org/2010/Perry.pdf.
Piketty, Thomas. Capital in the Twenty-‐First Century. Translated by Arthur Goldhammer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014.
Pillai, Rajnandini, Susan Stites-‐Doe, and Glen Brodowsky. “Presidential Scandal and Leadership: A Natural Laboratory Test of the Resiliency of President Clinton’s Transformational Leadership during the Impeachment Crisis.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 34, no. 6 (2004): 1109–1130. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-‐1816.2004.tb01998.x.
Pinderhughes, Charles. “Toward a New Theory of Internal Colonialism.” Journal of the Research Group on Socialism and Democracy 25, no. 1 (2011): 235–256. doi: 10.1080/08854300.2011.559702.
Poutanen, Seppo, and Anne Kovalainen, “Critical Theory.” In Encyclopedia of Case Study Research, edited by Albert J. Mills, Gabriele Durepos, and Elden Wiebe, 260–264. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage (2010).
Prashad, Vijay. “American Grand Strategy and the Assassination of the Third World.” Critical Asian Studies 37:1 (2005): 117–127. doi: 10.1080/1467271052000305331.
President Chávez’s Speech to the United Nations. venezuelanalysis.com. Translated by Nestor Sanchez. http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1365.
Price, Richard, ed. Maroon Societies: Rebel Slave Communities in the Americas, 2nd ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979.
Qaddafi, Muammar. The Green Book. http://www.mathaba.net/gci/theory/gb.htm.
273
Quijano, Anibal. “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America.” Nepantla: Views from South 1, no. 3 (2000): 533–580. doi: 10.1177/0268580900015002005.
———. “Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality.” Cultural Studies 21, no. 2/3 (2007): 168–178. doi: 10.1080/09502380601164353.
Rabaka, Reiland. “Weapon of Theory: Amilcar Cabral and the Weapon of Critical Theory.” In Claim No Easy Victories: The Legacy of Amilcar Cabral, edited by Firoze Manji and Bill Fletcher, Jr., 109–127. Dakar, Senegal: CODESRIA/Daraja Press, 2013.
Rancière, Jacques. “What Does It Mean to Be Un?” Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 21, no. 4 (2007): 559–569. doi: 10.1080/10304310701629961.
Rayma Caricaturas, El Universal, December 10, 2012. http://www.eluniversal.com/eu3/vinetasdelMes12_2012.html.
———. FaceBook Page. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1086702040132&set=pb.1003856565.-‐2207520000.1408032770.&type=3&theater.
———. Twitter post. https://twitter.com/raymacaricatura/status/493928806907121664/photo/1.
Reuters, “Venezuela Gains Support of Malaysia in UN Bid.” Montreal Gazette, August 28, 2006. http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=0a3e7c15-‐d1bb-‐4cb5-‐9f43-‐984be8f12fda.
Reyes, José Bracho. Chimbanguele: Paradigma del Cimarronaje Cultural en Venezuela Caracas: Consejo Nacional de la Cultura, 2005.
Richter, Paul, and Maggie Farley. “U.S. Is Aiming to Block Chávez.” Los Angeles Times, June 19, 2006. http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jun/19/world/fg-‐venezuela19.
Rodriguez, Francisco. “An Empty Revolution: The Unfulfilled Promises of Hugo.” Foreign Affairs 87, no. 2 (2008): 47–62.
Romero, Simon. “Venezuela’s President Scorned by Bitter Political Foe: His Ex-‐Wife.” New York Times, May 12, 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/12/world/americas/12venezuela.html?_r=0.
274
Salas, Jesus Maria Herrera. “Ethnicity and Revolution: The Political Economy of Racism in Venezuela.” Latin American Perspectives 32, no. 2 (2005): 72–91. doi: 10.1177/0094582X04273869.
———. How Europe Appropriated the African Mother’s Milk in the Caribbean: An Essay on “Barbarism” and “Civilization.” Caracas: Editorial Tropykos Fund, 2005.
———, and Miquel Izard. The Black Miguel and the First Venezuelan Revolution: The Culture of Power and the Power of Culture. Caracas: Vadell Brothers, 2003.
Salter, Lee, and Dave Weltman. “Class, Nationalism and News: The BBC’s Reporting of Hugo and the Bolivarian Revolution.” International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics 7, no. 3 (2011): 253–273. doi: 10.1386/macp.7.3.253_1.
Schiavoni, Christina, and William Camacaro. “The Venezuelan Effort to Build a New Food and Agriculture System.” Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine 61, no. 3 (2009): 129–141.
Schön, Donald A. "Knowing-‐in-‐Action: The New Scholarship Requires a New Epistemology." Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 27, no. 6 (1995): 27–34.
Schonauer, David. “Latin American Illustracion Winner Spotlight: Kiko Rodriguez.” Dispatches from Latin America. May 22, 2013. http://www.ai-‐ap.com/publications/article/6584/latin-‐american-‐ilustracion-‐winner-‐spotlight-‐kiko.html.
Scott, James M., and Carie A. Steele. "Assisting Democrats or Resisting Dictators? The Nature and Impact of Democracy Support by the United States National Endowment for Democracy, 1990–99." Democratization 12, no. 4 (2005): 439–460. doi: 10.1080/13510340500225947.
Scott, Peter Dale. Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.
———. The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil, and the Attack on American Democracy. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Serbin, Andres. Chávez, Venezuela y la Reconfiguracion Politica de America Latina y el Caribe. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI, 2010.
Sharpley-‐Whiting, T. Denean. Frantz Fanon: Conflicts and Feminisms. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1998.
Shifter, Michael. “In Search of Hugo.” Foreign Affairs 85, no. 3 (May/June 2006): 45–59.
275
Sibrian, Nairbis, and Mario Millones Espinosa. “Antagonismo y Disenso: Tensiones y Limites en la Construccion Mediatica de la Political en Venezuela.” Iconos: Revista de Ciencias Sociales 46 (2013): 49–65. doi: 10.17141/iconos.46.2013.52.
Sloan, Stephen. “On the Other Foot: Oral History Students As Narrators.” Oral History Review 39, no. 2 (2012): 298–311. doi: 10.1093/ohr/ohs086.
Spanakos, Anthony Peter. “New Wine, Old Bottles, Flamboyant Sommelier: Citizenship, and Populism.” New Political Science 30, no. 4 (2008): 521–544. doi: 10.1080/07393140802493308.
Stake, Robert E. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995.
Staller, Karen M. “Epistemological Boot Camp: The Politics of Science and What Every Qualitative Researcher Needs to Know to Survive in The Academy.” Qualitative Social Work 12, no. 4 (2012): 395–413. doi: 10.1177/1473325012450483.
Tan, Hwee Hoon, and Gladys Wee, “The Role of Rhetoric Content in Charismatic Leadership: A Content Analysis of a Singaporean Leader’s Speech.” International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior 5, no. 3/4 (2002): 317–342. doi: 10.1081/OTB-‐120014894.
Thalhammer, Kritsina, Paula O’Loughlin, Sam McFarland, Myron Glazer, Penina Glazer, Sharon Shepela, and Nathan Stottzfus, Courageous resistance: The Power of Ordinary People. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007.
“THE FIRST PEOPLES: Ancient Voices–New Evidence Shows That the First Americans Were BLACK! ” YouTube video, 49:11. From British Broadcasting Corporation documentary, Ancient Voices, televised 1999. Posted by Michael Heath. Posted August 16, 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiumX48gm1w.
“This Mouth, This Hair,” YouTube video, 1:15. Posted by Cynthia McKinney, October 6, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqCgiv6QBeQ.
Thomas, Gary. “A Typology for the Case Study in Social Science Following a Review of Definition, Discourse, and Structure.” Qualitative Inquiry 17, no. 6 (2011): 511–521. doi: 10.1177/1077800411409884.
“U.S. and Venezuela Diplomats Fight over Everything, Including Fast Food.” Before It’s News, July 14, 2011. http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2011/07/u-‐s-‐and-‐venezuela-‐diplomats-‐fight-‐over-‐everything-‐including-‐fast-‐food-‐818744.html.
276
U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian. Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964 – 1968, Volume XXIII Congo, 1960–1968. http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-‐68v23.
U.S. Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities. Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans, Book II, April 23, 1976, 94th Congress. Rep. No. 94-‐755, at 5. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/book2/pdf/ChurchB2_1_Introduction.pdf.
———. Interim Report, 1975. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/ir/html/ChurchIR_0043a.htm.
———. Supplementary Detailed Staff Reports on Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans, April 23, 1976, 94th Congress. Rep. No. 94-‐755, Accessed February 16, 2014, http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/book3/html/ChurchB3_0007a.htm.
Van Dijk, Teun A., ed. Racism and Discourse in Latin America. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2009.
Vandenberg, Helen E.R., and Wendy A. Hall. “Critical ethnography: Extending Attention to Bias and Reinforcement of Dominant Power Relations.” Nurse Researcher 18, no. 3 (2011): 25–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.7748/nr2011.04.18.3.25.c8460.
Vargas Llosa, Alvaro. “The Return of the Idiot.” Foreign Policy 160 (May/June 2007): 54–61.
Varner, Bill. “Chávez’s Push for UN Council Seat Sets Up a Showdown with U.S.” Bloomberg, October 11, 2006. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aHbR19zyxptU&refer=news.
“Venezuela’s Delusions of Wealth.” Wilson Quarterly 25, no. 4 (2001): 131–132.
Veric, Charlie Samuya. “Third World Project, or How Poco Failed.” Social Text 114 31, no. 1 (2013): 1–20. doi: 10.1215/01642472-‐1958872.
Vinthagen, Stellan. “Power As Subordination and Resistance As Disobedience: Non-‐violent Movements and the Management of Power.” Asian Journal of Social Science 34, no. 1 (2006): 1–21. doi: 10.1163/156853106776150207.
277
Visser, Irene. “Trauma theory and Postcolonial Literary Studies.” Journal of Postcolonial Writing 47, no. 3 (2011): 270–282. doi: 10.1080/17449855.2011.569378.
Webber, Jeffery R. “Venezuela under Chávez: The Prospects and Limitations of Twenty-‐First Century Socialism, 1999–2009.” Socialist Studies 6, no. 1 (2010): 11–44. https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/sss/article/view/23673/17557.
Weber, Max. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. New York: Free Press, 1947.
Weisbrot, Mark. “Left Hook.” Foreign Affairs 85, no. 4 (2006): 200–201.
Weissman, Stephen R. “An Extraordinary Rendition.” Intelligence and National Security 25, no. 2 (2010): 198–222. doi: 10.1080/02684527.2010.489277.
Whitehead, Laurence. “The Hazards of Convergence.” In Emerging Market Democracies: East Asia and Latin America, edited by Laurence Whitehead, 181–209. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press/National Endowment for Democracy, 2002.
Whitney, Robert, and Graciela Chailloux Laffita. Subjects or Citizens: British Caribbean Workers in Cuba: 1900–1960. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2013.
Wood, Peter H. Black Majority: Negroes in Colonial South Carolina From 1670 through the Stono Rebellion. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1974.
Wright, John. A History of Libya. London: C. Hurst, 2012.
Yester, Katherine. “The Everywhere Man.” Foreign Policy, October 19, 2009, 38. http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/19/the-‐everywhere-‐man/.
Young, Iris Marion. Responsibility for Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Yunus, Muhammad, with Karl Weber. Building Social Business: The New Kind of Capitalism That Serves Humanity’s Most Pressing Needs. Dhaka, Bangladesh: University Press, 2010.
Zapata-‐Sepulveda, Pamela. “Breaking My Academic Silence to Start Again: Making Sense of Why I am Here, Moving from the Thin to Thick. Thinking About Trauma and Loss . . .“ Qualitative Inquiry 18, no. 8 (2012): 643–650. doi: 10.1177/1077800412452853.
Top Related