In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

C h A P t e r t w o Participatory Democracy in Venezuela Origins, Ideas, and Implementation Margarita López Maya and Luis E. Lander Since 1999 the Bolivarian government has been promoting “participatory and protagonistic” democracy in response to a broad and deeply felt aspiration in Venezuelan society that dates back to the 1980s. Unlike the case in the countries of the Southern Cone, in Venezuela democracy was never interrupted by military dictatorship in the 1960s and 1970s. For this reason, in the 1990s Venezuelans did not experience a transition from authoritarianism to a restricted democracy, as occurred, for example, in Chile or Argentina. On the contrary, diverse and ever-expanding social and protest movements, as well as some political parties, demanded a reform of the state in order to achieve a more “profound,” more “integral” democracy. This demand was, in one way or another , frustrated by several governments, including those of Jaime Lusinchi (1984–89), with his failed “Reform of the State,” Carlos Andrés Pérez (in his second presidency, 1989–93) with his neoliberal reforms, and Rafael Caldera (in his second presidency, 1994–99) with his postponed constitutional reform. Only the Bolivarians had the political will to accomplish the task; upon assuming power in 1999 they almost immediately initiated the process of writing a new constitution. They elected and installed a constituent assembly to produce a constitution that made a reality of demands postponed for years. The “Exposition of Motives” in the 1999 Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela says that the Republic has been “re-founded” to establish “a more democratic society. Not only is it the state that should now be more democratic, but also society.” Democracy, by this logic, ought not to be restricted exclusively to the political sphere; it should impregnate all the spaces of social life. This newly born democracy incorporated in its discourse novel proposals to address grave problems of exclusion and social injustice afflicting the majority PArtICIPAtory deMoCrACy 59 of the country. For this reason it ran counter to the globally hegemonic way of thinking and has been viewed with suspicion and frank aversion by some sociopolitical actors and political players in Venezuelan society, as well as by hegemonic actors in the global capitalist system. It also initially awoke suspicion among groups and political actors of the left, among other reasons because it originated mainly from sectors—including the military—quite alien from the traditional left, and because its philosophical bases are rooted in sources distinct from traditional Marxist thought. Foundations “Participatory and protagonistic” democracy, as outlined in the Constitution of 1999, proceeds fundamentally from the progressive liberal thought of JeanJacques Rousseau and John Stuart Mill, and also from more recent ideas about democratic socialism by Nicos Poulantzas. Works by these authors, among others, were widely disseminated and debated in Latin America in the 1970s and 1980s, but their ideas were discarded in the Southern Cone after the fall of the military dictatorships, in favor of a more procedural or restricted type of democracy. The terrible experience of authoritarianism and abuses of power in this period dictated a more cautious approach to a democratic transition. By contrast, broader ideas about democracy fell on fertile soil in Venezuela. Already in the time of President Lusinchi social organizations and political parties of opposition sought to incorporate modalities of direct democracy into proposals to reform the state. But it was with the hegemonic shift toward the Bolivarian forces that these ideas prospered, germinating in Chapter IV of the new constitution, which in the Exposition of Motives consecrated citizens’ rights to direct, semi-direct and indirect participation, not only through the vote in electoral processes but also by way of the “formulation, execution, and control of public administration” (Constitución de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela [CrBV] 1999). In this respect the change of emphasis from the Constitution of 1961 is notable. While representative democratic institutions are maintained, now participation in all spheres of the state is regarded as a key educational practice for transforming fundamentally unequal social relations. For its part, the Líneas generales del plan de desarrollo económico y social de la nación 2001 (hereafter Guidelines) provided the orientation for public policy for the constitutional period that ended in January 2007, the conclusion of Chávez’s first term, The Guidelines held that participation would stimulate self-betterment, inculcate co-responsibility, and give impetus to the “protagonism” of the citi- [3.17.150.163] Project...

Share