I’ll be kind enough though to elaborate for you in response with material from a thesis I presented in 2003, and for the benefit of your understanding. As for the movement which you mention that brought Chavez to power, its circumstances are exceptional and very different from anything else in Latin America. His victory over the oligarchy was earned in 98′ by his careful planning since ten years prior to his failed coup attempt in 92′ which landed him in jail thus giving him time to further develop his Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement. A closer examination of his involvement in the failed coup should help portray a more realistic impression of Chávez’s political dogma and aspirations which were solidified with the support of the people and the movement that followed — the movement was actually an effect of his not accomplishing the coup and getting arrested.

As unsuccessful as the attempted coup may have appeared to observers, McCoy points out that it generated wide support within the lower and middle classes, and several weeks later on March 10, thousands of citizens banged on pots throughout the country to protest government policies and to support coup plotters (1999:64-5). Receiving the social response he had hoped for, Chávez was apprehended and incarcerated, with nearly two years to qualify his next revolutionary objective.

Like his openly pronounced hero, Simón Bolívar, who liberated the Andean countries of the region, Chávez’s involvement in the coup attempt of 1992 would act as a catalyst for political change to bring improved socio-economic conditions to the people of Venezuela…someday.

Chávez brilliantly observed the manipulation and perpetuation of the social harmony illusion at the hands of Venezuela’s politicians over their years in tenure, and realized that by exposing its inherent untruths in his campaign, he could rally the people most affected by this prevailing illusion – the growing impoverished – and win the presidency. This wasn’t a movement like that of Bolivia which produced Morales from their ranks, Chavez had been a long time military leader and Punto Fijo Pact opponent. His actions to overthrow the government fell short temporarily and got the attention of the people who rallied around him thus precipitating the movement.

South America is certainly a somewhat better place to live overall with quality of life increasing in some nations, still falling in others, but its problems are not solved by a long shot. Caracas for instance is now the most dangerous city in Latin America, I wouldn’t necessarily say that it’s a better place to live than a decade ago. Colombia still has a an active conflict and people continue to be displaced and murdered. In short, quality of life is relative and its spread is not homogeneous. Chavez will hopefully continue to do more, and the nations aligning with him will make the region stronger still. But there is a lot of work to be done, and Chavez appears to have established an effective model that says Fuck You Washington! Power to the people!

¡Que vivan los pueblos libres y soberanos!

Hope that helps you, best.

South America is a much better place to live today than it was a decade ago.

very well documented, we´ve obviously seen a bias attitude toward Venezuela from the US media since the overthrow of the favorable oligarchs under Punto Fijo; were they motivated by Chavez´bold rejection of US policy, attempting to paint him as yet another incooperative bad guy? Quite probable.

Harvard Review of Latin America claims that poverty dropped by half between 2003-7, likely more since 1999 when he took office. In that same period, extreme poverty fell by 70%, an impressive accomplishment in this part of the world.

The US media in general, like the Venezuelan elite, are pissed off that an incorruptible leader has finally discouraged the fleecing of the nation´s petro wealth…it´s being siphoned off to the poor for once instead of the pockets of traditional hegemonic control. May it continue on this progressive track improving the lives of millions.

Best to you.