Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What is Venezuela's crisis really about
What is Venezuela's crisis really about
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: What is Venezuela's crisis really about
With over 190 nations in our world, each nation has their form of governance. With each form of governance, comes a different set of successes and struggles. The development of each nation is unique to its region as each region faces different factors that have shaped them to what they are today. These factors include, but are not limited to, their natural resources, their economic sectors, and their social structure. Latin America is a region with unique development. The history of Latin America has been tumultuous as it faces cultural, economic, and political changes that contribute to mold the region to what it is today. The world is watching Venezuela as it is coming close to a collapse due to the economic and social conditions that are …show more content…
In the past century, the region underwent different forms of governance. Authoritarian regimes, democratic governments, military dictatorships, and populism have all taken root in Latin American politics. Of these types, the most prominent and influential figures were known to be populist leaders. Populist stand out compared to other ordinary politicians as they tend to have characteristic traits of being bold, daring, and displaying a vast amount of nationalistic pride. Although the effect of populist leaders in Latin America has not always been in positive light, it is commonly agreed on the prodigious impact populism has had in Latin …show more content…
The first form is a moderate form of the left, this is known as neoliberal neopopulism. Neopopulism was present in Argentina under Carlos Menem, Brazil with Fernando Collor de Mello, in Ecuador under Abdalá Bucaram as well as in Peru under Alberto Fujimori. Neopopulism saw a gamut of degrees of success since some leaderships lasted for half a year while others such as Carlos Menem and Alberto Fujimori were reelected. The second form of populism that remerges is far-out and is known as radical populism. An example of radical populism would be Bolivia under Evo Morales and in Venezuela under Hugo Chávez. To understand populism and its different forms, it is important to compare the similarities that are present as well as contrast the differences that makes each
Models for post-revolutionary Latin American government are born of the complex economic and social realities of 17th and 18th century Europe. From the momentum of the Enlightenment came major political rebellions of the elite class against entrenched national monarchies and systems of power. Within this time period of elitist revolt and intensive political restructuring, the fundamental basis for both liberal and conservative ideology was driven deep into Latin American soil. However, as neither ideology sought to fulfill or even recognize the needs or rights of mestizo people under government rule, the initial liberal doctrine pervading Latin American nations perpetuated racism and economic exploitation, and paved the way for all-consuming, cultural wars in the centuries to come.
“Latin America includes the entire continent of South America, as well as Mexico. Central America, and the Caribbean Islands. Physical geography has played an important role in the economic development of Latin America.” (Doc A and Doc G) Latin America has many unique cultural characteristics, industrial products, agricultural products, and human activity.
When populism was first used in the United States in the late 1800s, it was geared towards the farmers. The focus on farmers showed the interest the Populists had toward working class people, who made up the majority of the nation. Even though there were more working class people than wealthy, it was the wealthy business owners who ruled society. They ran political machines and monopolies and did not provide the best working and living conditions for their employees. William Jennings Bryan said, “There are two ideas of government...those who believe that if you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea...if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity
In all the history of America one thing has been made clear, historians can’t agree on much. It is valid seeing as none of them can travel back in time to actually experience the important events and even distinguish what has value and what doesn’t. Therefore all historians must make a leap and interpret the facts as best they can. The populist movement does not escape this paradox. Two views are widely accepted yet vastly different, the views of Richard Hofstadter and Lawrence Goodwyn. They disagree on whether populists were “isolated and paranoid bigots” or “sophisticated, empathetic egalitarians”; whether their leaders were “opportunists who victimized them” or “visionary economic theorists who liberated them”; whether their beliefs were rooted in the free silver campaign of the 1890s or the cooperative movement of the 1880s; and finally whether their ideal society was in the “agrarian past” or “the promise of a cooperative future”. They could not agree on anything, over all Richard Hofstadter seems to have a better idea of the truth of populism.
Burns, E. B., & Charlip, J. A. (2007). Latin America: an interpretive history (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
The People's Party, also known as the "Populists", was a short-lived political party in the United States established in 1891 during the Populist movement. It was most important in 1892-96, and then rapidly faded away. Based among poor, white cotton farmers in the South and hard-pressed wheat farmers in the plain states, it represented a radical crusading form of agrarianism and hostility to banks, railroads, and elites generally. It sometimes formed coalitions with labor unions, and in 1896, the Democrats endorsed their presidential nominee, William Jennings Bryan. The terms "populist" and "populism" are commonly used for anti-elitist appeals in opposition to established interests and mainstream parties. Though the party did not win much of anything it did however shape the United States we know today.
Harry E. Canden. , & Gary Prevost, (2012). Politics Latin America. (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
The Populist Party, although short lived, was one of the most successful third party movements in American history. Though the party itself is no longer existent, many of the party’s ideas and goals lead to legislation after their demise.
Since the 1970s, Venezuela has gone from being South America’s richest nation into a nouveau-poor society in search of an identity. Once known as the Saudis of the West, Venezuelans have seen their economic fortunes decline in exact proportion to the general fall in world oil prices. Even so, Venezuela’s many problems were hidden from view until relatively recently, when severity measures heralded the sort of economic crises so painfully familiar to other Latin American countries. Runaway inflation, currency devaluations and even food riots have marked this new phase in Venezuelan history, to which the country is still trying to adjust.
By 1900, the Populist Party was in decline. (n.d.). The Populist Movement - Boundless Open Textbook Retrieved from
Mignolo, W. D. (2005). The Idea of Latin America (pp. 1-94). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Mignolo, W. D. (2005). The Idea of Latin America (pp. 1-94). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Venezuela was one of the richest countries that emerged from the collapse of Gran Colombia in 1830 (the others being Colombia and Ecuador). For most of the first half of the 20th century, Venezuela was ruled by generally benevolent military strongmen, who promoted the oil industry and allowed for some social reforms. Democratically elected governments have held sway since 1959. Current concerns include: a polarized political environment, a politicized military, drug-related violence along the Colombian border, increasing internal drug consumption, overdependence on the petroleum industry with its price fluctuations, and irresponsible mining operations that are endangering the rain forest and indigenous peoples.
Hugo Chavez was a powerful and positive force in addressing social issues, however, his singular focus on social issues at the expense of other matters of the country left the Venezuelan economy in tatters. In 1998, 50.4% of the Venezuelan population was living below the poverty line, where as in 2006 the numbers dropped to 36.3% (Chavez leaves). Although he aggressively confronted the issue of poverty in Venezuela, many other problems were worsened. Some Chavez critics say he used the state oil company like a piggy bank for projects: funding homes, and healthcare while neglecting oil infrastructure and production. Without growth in the oil ind...
Much G. L., 2004, Democratic Politics in Latin America: New Debates and Research Frontiers, Annual Reviews