Good readings on Chavez, Chavismo, and the future of Venezuela

Like many Latin America enthusiasts, I've found Venezuela's Hugo Chavez to be one of the most interesting and important figures in the politics of the Western Hemisphere in generations, for better or worse. His death this week may (or may not) be the end of an era, but his legacy will likely continue to have huge impacts on politics, economics, and society in Venezuela--if not throughout the region--for years to come.

Rather than pontificating on the virtues and vices of his tenure at Venezuela's helm, I thought I'd leave it up to some more qualified writers. Here you go...

Juan Forero has a good primer of the questions swirling around Chavez' absence on the Washington Post.

The New York Times has a piece focusing on el Comandante's chosen successor, Nicolas Maduro and his potential relationship with the U.S. He notes that while Maduro has already started to adopt some of Chavez' personal quirks, including his strident anti-Americanism, others think he may prove to be a more pragmatic leader.

The Washington Office on Latin America's David Smilde has a good Q&A on the Venezuelan Politics and Human Rights blog, as well as a thoughtful take on the (hopefully) permanent inclusion of Venezuela's most marginalized in the country's political system--despite continued struggles.

This editorial on The Guardian has a brief look at the challenges Chavez' own oil-fueled largess may leave for his own country--especially the poor urban masses who so benefited from it.

The BBC provides a profile of Chavez, from his training as an army paratrooper, to the 1992 coup, to the presidency. The Guardian has another, here.

Writing on The Atlantic, Francisco Toro takes a serious look at the dark side of Chavez harassment and bullying of dissident voices, especially within his own movement. He's right that while many in the U.S. may have gotten a kick out of Chavez calling President Bush the devil, or blaming the absence of life on Mars, or the earthquake in Haiti on American-style capitalism or secret "tectonic" weaponry, respectively, this stuff wasn't so amusing to many Venezuelans. He writes, "This image of El Comandante as a mere eccentric drove those of us who witnessed the progressive disintegration of Venezuela's democratic institutions around the bend. A rogue looks a lot less lovable when laughing at him can cost you your job, your property, your livelihood, your freedom."

The Miami Herald's Andres Oppenheimer compares Chavez' legacy to that of Argentina's Peron. I agree that Chavez is likely to be little more than a cultural icon beyond Venezuela from here on out, and that Chavez has not been the only one who's helped the poor (Peru and Chile--hardly bastions of leftist government in the last decade--did even more to alleviate poverty than Chavez). But, his memory will certainly prove useful to all sorts of electoral groups vying for power--whether on the left or right. I think this has already begun to happen; Chavez' opponent in October's election, Henrique Capriles, seemed forced to accept the continued existence of many of Chavez' most popular social programs. This could last for decades.

Al Jazeera English has a handful of op-eds looking at various aspects of Chavez' legacy. Janvieve Williams Comrie looks at the impacts of Chavez on race relations and the improved position of many ethnic and racial minorities, both in Venezuela and throughout the region. This is one of the least talked about aspects of Chavismo, especially in the U.S. media, but may be one of Chavez' most important and long-lasting impacts.

Mark Weisbrot, of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, has a favorable view of Chavez' legacy on poverty in the country and for Latin American independence from the U.S. Manuela Picq and Belen Fernandez also write (mostly sympathetically) on the ability of Chavez to incorporate Venezuela's long marginalized lower classes into the country's politics and economy. Particularly interesting are Picq's thoughts the rise of the Left in Latin America during the past 14 years or so. I think Chavez' role in this respect is often exaggerated (I give more credit to moderate leftists in some Mexican states, and to Brazil's "Lula"), but not unimportant.

Also writing on Al Jazeera, Mike Allison, a Central America expert, has some insights into how Chavez' death might impact politics in the region and how Chavez the figure might compare to other Latin American figures such as Allende, Arbenz, or Peron. I'd also recommend reading Allison's blog; he's prolific and really insightful.

The Christian Science Monitor's blog, the Latin American Monitor, has a handful of posts on the subject of Chavez and his succession, one of which focuses specifically on the character of Nicolas Maduro, who has already begun to "channel his inner Chavez."

Another good blog, Bloggings by Boz, looks at the possibility of Venezuela (indeed, Latin America) moving beyond the timeless figure of the caudillo. This is especially good reading for gringos (myself included), who may be more prone to look at Latin American politics and leadership through jaded eyes, wondering who (read: which new caudillo) will replace Chavez.

If anyone has any good suggested reading on the future of the Venezuelan party system, I'd love to see it; I think this is one of the more uncertain and unexplored issues, beyond the simple question of who will govern in Venezuela. Chavez came to power following the collapse of one of Latin America's most durable two-party systems in the 1980s and 90s. His career has obviously destroyed any remnants of this punto fijo system--so, where to now?