Life in Caracas can be difficult. Julia_1984 mentioned that it can be depressing for anti-Chavez Venezuelans to stay informed of current events by watching the only remaining opposition TV channel. She says, “[a]fter 15 minutes watching that channel you will end up with the idea that Chavez might take away the kids and put the rest of us in labor camps. And you will have strong basis to support that idea.”[1] The sensationalist demeanor of the sole remaining opposition channel has the ability to make unimaginable circumstances seem possible, but at the same time takes away from its credibility. Instead, Julia_1894 suggests that to get a real understanding of what is going on in Caracas, one must turn to the internet.[2] The internet, with its hundreds of varied sources and biases, provides a medium which one can more thoroughly explore the entire picture for a better understanding of an event. Mass media tends to take a side and be sensationalist all over the world, but the extreme polarization of its mass media makes Venezuela a special case; both sides act over the top in vehement opposition and there are rarely reasonably expressed points of view. However, as of late January this year, there is only one point of view on TV. Chavez took RCTV—an opposition TV channel—off the air because it said it would not comply with the governments new law to host Chavez’s Alo Presidante TV program. The representatives for RCTV stated that “[t]he government is inappropriately pressuring [RCTV] to make decisions beyond their responsibilities.”[3] To show Chavez’s programming was probably not part of the initial contract, more likely, it was one of Chavez’s whims—like when, in the middle of one of his shows, he decided right then to send the military to the Columbian border, purely out out anger. Whatever it was, Chavez has silenced the opposition's one medium that can reach the illiterate--TV. Limiting the television to only pro-revolution media was a smart move and probably Chavez's intent because the poor and illiterate are where he finds most of his support.
In March this year, Chavez arrested the owner of Venezuela’s only remaining opposition TV channel. “Attorney General Luisa Ortega said a warrant was issued for the arrest of Guillermo Zuloaga, owner of the TV channel Globovision, for remarks that were deemed 'offensive' to the president.”[4] The remarks that were made on the program were simply “Venezuela has turned into a haven for drug traffickers” and “Venezuela's government has cooperated with the Basque separatist group ETA and Colombian rebels.”[5] First, surely Chavez does not want to hear these remarks, but he has no right to restrict them from the public debate. If he does, then the popular democracy cannot properly function because the peoples vote needs to be informed by all perspectives, not just by Chavez’s. This is a very serious move one step closer to an authoritarian dictatorship.
Julia_1984 says that the middle class families in Caracas are afraid of the loss of democracy and that Chavez strains them to the point that even though an entire family has agreed to oppose Chavez, they still get in fights over when their troubles will be over and what are they going to do until then.[6] At the micro level, the political policies and decisions greatly affect the family and individual lives of the residents of Caracas. This is a good reminder for us Canadians; although we may think we do not feel the effects of politics in our everyday lives, the effects are there. In Canada the effects just go unnoticed for the most part because Canada has a plentitude of resources and wealth. In Caracas, the allocation of wealth and resources is very poorly handled and the resources to be allocated are less abundant than here in Canada. Moreover, Canadian leaders run a style of democracy where minorities have rights. In contrast, Chavez’s policies disregard minority rights, in this case, the minority is the middle and upper-classes. The enemy in Caracas today is not the criminal, but the wealthy capitalist. Yet it is such a paradox because it is capitalism that fills Venezuela's coffers. The many decisions made by the government over the past ten years has led to a culmination of electricity shortages, massive inflation, crime and violence, and these factors all have direct and indirect effects on the lives of the people living in Caracas. Now their democracy and ability to decide for themselves how to solve these issues or to freedom elect someone who will is being taken away.
Although, Julia_1984 was able to deal with the constant onslaught of Chavez speeches, new policy announcements and bad news coming from the television (most of Chavez’s ideas and policies would be bad from her perspective because she is middle class), she said her “limit” or breaking point, was when the announcement was made that all shopping malls can only use electricity from 11:00am to 9:00pm.[7] To a foreign reader, this seems like a snobby middle-class kid from Caracas getting upset because she can no longer spend all hours of the day shopping at the mall. But Julia_1984 substantiates her reason for why the short hours of mall operation is her “limit”.
For Venezuelans (her peers at least) “the mall is the center of the social life”.[8] In Canada, we have public spaces such as boardwalks, squares, parks, and the streets to hang out at, even with all of these spaces, one can still find groups of youth “hanging around” the our malls. In Caracas, it is too dangerous to be in many of the traditional public spaces like squares or parks plus a mall is air conditioned and shelters one from the rain or sun. Thus, at the basic level, the security and shelter offered by a shopping mall has made it a place of social interaction for many middle-class residents of Caracas.[9] From a deeper perspective, the malls become little cultural centers, offering art exhibits, movie theatres, discos and restaurants; almost like a city within a city. In Julia_1984’s own words:
The mall is the place where we make a business deal in the middle of an informal lunch, then meet our soul mate after work and walk hand in hand throughout the halls till we find a cozy bench to sit, a nice table to have dinner, a good movie to watch, a play we shouldn’t miss; and then meet our friends for a few drinks or a dance.[10]
This sounds like a wonderful place to be, maybe a little romanticized, but with all of those amenities and safety from the 130 murders per 100,000[11] people crime rate, this is where I would socialize too. The shopping mall in Caracas is something like a utopian space built inside of a dystopian city. When the government ordered the shortened operating hours of the mall, it was not just conserving electricity. From an monetary oriented point of view, the shorter operating hours decreased opportunity for businesses to sell their goods and services, hurting the economy. From the point of view of the thousands that use the mall for more than just shopping, the government was chipping away at their quality of life, their social life—a most important topic for youth. It is understandable why from Julia_1984’s perspective, this was her limit. She mentions: why wasn’t food or water shortages her limit? Because she could always go and forget about all the problems and shortages when she was at the mall socializing; it was her refuge. [12] With all of the the shortages of food, water, electricity and the murders and protests the mall is a release for people like Julia_1984. To take away their pleasure is not a stabilizing factor and does not help gain their support, instead it invokes protest and discontent within the already unstable city. However, Chavez does not care. The people who enjoy their time at shopping centers are likely middle-class and probably do not vote for Chavez anyway so to take away from them only gains him support from the lower classes. In the same way Robin Hood was loved by the poor for what he did, Chavez does the same, in addition to violating human rights and banning free speech.
[1] Julia_1984, "My limit (a very angry post in 5 parts), Part #1." The end of Venezuela as I know it, Blogger, January 3, 2010. http://antipatrioticvenezuelan.blogspot.com/ (accessed April 10, 2010).
[2] Ibid.
[3] Associated Press, "Cable TV Station Critical of Chávez Is Shut Down." New York Times, January 24, 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/world/americas/25venez.html?scp=5&sq=Cable%20TV%20Station%20Critical%20of%20Ch%E1vez%20Is%20Shut%20Down%20&st=cse (accessed April 12, 2010).
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Julia_1984, "My limit part #1."
[7] Julia_1984, "My limit part #2."
[8] Julia_1984, "My limit part #3."
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Arthur Brice, "No surprise Caracas named 'murder capital of world'." CNN.com, December 31, 2008. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/12/31/Venezuela.murder.capital/(accessed March 28, 2010).
[12] Julia_1984, "My limit part #3."
Why a section on globalization? This blog has attempted to address topics and information in regard to Caracas, within the last ten years or so. However, because history is so relevant to the state of contemporary times, there has been some overlap. Globalization has definitely been happening for more than the last ten years, but other than the advent of the computer and the internet, globalization has never taken place at a more furious rate than it is today. 7 years ago, it would have been difficult to connect to a wireless connection in nearly every residential and commercial building—today, wireless is ubiquitous. Moreover, 7 years ago I would have had to call it a “wireless internet” connection for many people to understand what exactly was meant. Not until the Apple Iphone (unveiled 4 years ago) were we able to do so much from anywhere with such ease. At any rate, I am explaining globalization from a technology savvy consumers perspective, but in the case of Caracas, today I can read the Caracas local newspapers, buy shares of a company operating in Caracas, read translated twitter updates (Chavez hates twitter)from Caracas residents, and read and comment of the blogs of Venezuelans, from my computer at home in Canada. This is how I know we are extremely connected and that we are sharing culture, ideas, and status updates.
A note in regard to globalization and Twitter: the impact of technology and social media has recently made the president very angry. Students have been using Twitter to coordinate their protests much more effectively and opposition groups have used Twitter to denounce Chavez and get away with it. Unlike traditional mass media, which is merely banned or cut off, Chavez has fought back by declaring that “’using Twitter, the Internet (and) text messaging’ to criticize or oppose his increasingly authoritarian regime ‘is terrorism.’”[1] He says this when there is a facebook group with approximately 80,000 members (and growing) titled "Chavez esta PONCHAO!" ("Chavez, you struck out!").[2] By this saying, the members mean that he is finished, he has not done a good job and that he should step down from the presidency. I am curious if Chavez actually thinks that those 80,000 members and all the people using Twitter are terrorists…I doubt that. Chavez is just angry that--thanks to globalization and innovation--people in Caracas and Venezuela are able to freely express their opinions to each other and the world, and denounce the government anonymously.
There are a number of characteristics that make Caracas a unique city within Venezuela. It is the capital, the center of government, has many national and international business connections. It has technologically advanced economic activities and has the role of a nationwide service node.[3] Yet, even as a city that is part of the hierarchy of global cities and is taking part in globalization, Caracas is still characterized by marginalization and exclusion of portions of society.
Due to globalization the formal economy in Caracas has expanded and become increasingly interconnected. Today there are luxury hotels, massive shopping centers, a headquarters for the Stock Exchange, buildings for banks and corporations have been built, and the telecommunications system is highly advanced.[4] As an effect of the globalization process, transnational corporations located in Caracas cultivate the localized development of legal and accounting services.[5] Thus, globalization in Caracas has fostered burgeoning high technology, professional and financial sectors, leading to a sizeable amount of high paying jobs for skilled workers; however, the number of jobs in this highly formal sector of the economy is very small relative to the number of citizens in Caracas (3.15 million)[6]. The small number of high paying jobs only adds to the atrocious distribution of income:
Source:[7]
The above graph shows that the wealthiest 10 percent of the population thrive with 48 percent of the wealth, while the poorest scrape by with 10 percent. This graph is a generalization of all Latin American countries, but because Caracas is a capital city--highly susceptible to, and affected by globalization--and is known for its small middle class, one can deduct that the wealthiest 10 percent in Caracas control a certain degree more than 48 percent of the wealth. For a clarity’s sake, a study by Briceño-León (2005) revealed that the income disparity between the classes in 1970 was: the top 1 percent of the population’s income was 363 times that of the poorest 1 percent and by 1995 the ratio had risen to 417.[8] For the poorest of the poor to become poorer than they already are is not usually possible because these are the people with extremely little, to no income at all. Therefore, the only way for the income gap to increase is for the wealthy to become wealthier. In this case it is not poverty that grew, rather, inequality between the classes increased.
The influence of globalization in Caracas has lead to a restructuring of production and consumption[9]; those who are forced to deal with the concomitant consequences of globalization are the poor. While some of the fragments of the population are able to fully integrate into the global economy, others are excluded and become connected to the economy of poverty. Just as growth in the formal economy occurred because of globalization, employment in the low-productivity, low-income informal sector has also increased[10], but social mobility is reduced:
“Different forms of self-employment substitute for the contraction of jobs in the formal sector, the traditional channels of social mobility through education and employment lose their effectiveness, and the formerly adequate incomes from a number of occupations and professions are eroded.”[11]
As the relative income of society increases from the effects of global integration, the real wage of workers—that is, the worth of their money--decreases because when parts of the population have more money to spend, prices rise. In this type of social environment, education for the lower classes of society becomes difficult. Education becomes more expensive and they must work more hours to afford the same living standards they were used to before real wage decreased. The time spent working takes away from their time to spend on education therefore this traditional route of social mobility becomes much more difficult and their poverty is reinforced in this way.
The spatial arrangement of Caracas coincides with the class stratifications, but one of the indirect effects of globalization, is that the expansions of the city are physically shifting the classes around, and out. The center of Caracas has seen land values increase drastically as space becomes increasingly saturated and transnational corporations and businesses that pay top dollar for the central real-estate.[12] The core has become an alcove for the elite. This has forced many of the cities inhabitants to leave the expensive Caracas Metropolitan Area (CMA) and move to one of the four peri-urban areas located in the Caracas Metropolitan Region (CMR).[13] Thus, population growth in Caracas has been decreasing, while surrounding areas are expanding at a quickening rate because of more affordable housing and highways and public transportation systems. Within the CMA there are with the best public utilities and services, the most extensive infrastructure and/or the most comfortable climate.[14] Although the population that moves to the CMR periphery can afford a better standard of living than they could in the CMA, they lose the benefits of the city, not to mention the advantages of not having to commute long distances. In the following picture, the dark areas are the four peri-urban areas of the CMR; for many, the commute to Caracas for work or medical reasons etc. would be quite long and would cost them time and money.
Source:[15]
The changes brought about by globalization such as, the informalization of labor and falling real wages have increased social inequality in Caracas. This inequality is reinforced as the city fragments into multiple unequal territories; the fragmentation “is reinforced by each urban segment’s functional specialization depending on its greater of lesser articulation to the global network of economic relations.”[16] These spatial segments embody the social differences and increasing intricacies within society. The closer economic relationship a segment has in the game of globalization, the better off it is financially, and if a segment of the city is not functionally useful to the economic developments it becomes the underdeveloped and unkempt segment of the city. The wide range of differences that develop between these separate segments is why some have called them “multiple cities”.[17] They become so easily contrastable that these segments can be considered different cities. For example, think of a large metropolis, there are always areas that are more beautiful and safer than other areas in the same city. In Caracas, the contrast between city segments is extreme, some are beautiful, others are ugly. In essence globalization has gentrified Caracas; the core has become the residence of the wealthy and the peri-urban areas (black areas in above picture) become the residence of the vulnerable groups and the “new poor”, who have recently been displaced from the city. Once the “new poor” are displaced, they become worse off than they were before because their distance from the center of Caracas makes it more difficult to be part of the globalization and thus, they become systematically poor. Not only does the social order, which they likely already deal with, hold them back, but also the socioterritorial order and segmentation becomes a barrier and weakens their relationship to the globalized economy, with its epicenter based in the core of Caracas.
[1] Amar Toor, "Twitter Undermines Hugo Chavez's Media Takeover." AOL SWITCHED, February 4, 2010. http://www.switched.com/2010/02/04/twitter-undermines-hugo-chavezs-media-takeover/ (acessed April 19, 2010).
[2] Ibid.
[3] M. Lacabana and C. Cariola, "Globalization and metropolitan expansion: residential strategies and livelihoods in caracas and its periphery." Environment and Urbanization 15, no.1 (April, 2003), 66, http://www.eau.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/65.pdf (accessed March 28, 2010).
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid., 68.
[6] "Cities Of The World: Caracas, Venezuela, South America." City-data.com, http://www.city-data.com/world-cities/Caracas.html (accessed April 20, 2010)
[7] Roberto, Briceño-León, "Urban violence and public health in latin america: A sociological explanatory framework." Cadernos De Saúde Pública 21, no. 6 (2005), 48, http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0102-311X2005000600002&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en (accessed April 15, 2010).
[8] Ibid., 50
[9] M. Lacabana and C. Cariola, 65.
[10] Ibid., 66.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid., 67.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.,68.
[15] Ibid., 67.
[16] Mark Amen, et all., Relocating Global Cities: From the Center to the Margins (Rowman & Littlefield, 2006), 181, http://books.google.ca/ (accessed April 15, 2010).
[17] Ibid., 182.
Top image Source: Unnamed Author, The Consequences of Globalization, Katrina Hindman, December 18, 2008 http://khindman.wordpress.com/ (accessed April 20, 2010).
Today, violence and crime are one of the most serious problems in Caracas and if it was a city not formerly known to most of the world, it was recently put on the map as “Murder Capital of the World” with an alarming 510 murders in December 2009.[1] Venezuelans constantly say security is their top concern, even more important than inflation, which increased to 36 percent last September[2]. According to a survey by the Caracas-based polling company Datanalisis, 80 percent of respondents report being unsatisfied with how the president has handled crime.[2] This will not help the Chavistas in future elections because all classes of people feel the effects of crime. In fact it is likely that Chavez supporters—the poor—feel the effects of violent crime the worst. Both white collar and common crime are rampant and the government is impotent insofar as, the system does not work and corruption reigns.[3] The common and organized criminals pay the police and political officials to continue doing their illegal acts; this is a business in itself.
Unlike other countries in Latin America such as El Slavador or Columbia, Venezuela is not known to suffer from intense and ongoing political conflict. Yet, the murder rate in its Capital, Caracas, the murder rate is astonishing. Of the countries in Latin America Venezuela ranks as high on the list for murder at 31 murders per 100,000 people; if we scale down to just Caracas the murder rate goes up to 52 murders per 100,000 people (2000).[4] The higher murder rate in Caracas is likely, founded upon the extreme class stratification in and surrounding the city. In the backdrop of the class chasms, common crime, drug trafficking and emotional conflicts are amplified in a city where violence has become the routine way of settling disputes.[5] Urban poverty in Caracas leads the poor and oppressed to drastic measures; they vote for Chavez, kill people and commit crimes because these are the only ways they are able to improve their lives. Out of options, some of the poor resort to drug trafficking. It is likely that many people involved in this underworld trade are not criminals when they first start out trafficking drugs, rather, they are the poorest of the poor with no way to feed themselves or their families—would you not do the same? But, drug trafficking is a rough life with filled with sketchy people; it is the nature of the trade that one gets their hands bloody if they stay in it long enough. Once that happens, then they are truly criminals because they are no longer just feeding their families. Poverty is a natural factor for crime. The immense scale of poverty in Caracas is expected to create a certain amount of crime. However, the reason deaths result from common crime and emotional conflicts is because of two general factors that link to each other. Firstly, in a country that is plagued by the drug trade, life becomes cheap because of the way the drug trade treats people as disposable entities. Secondly, this idea—that violence is a routine thing and human life is disposable--works its way into the ethos of the culture where the norm becomes extreme violence during emotional conflicts and common crime and leads to a rise in murders.
Consider Tony Montana from Scarface while reading this: “A youth who sells drugs in Caracas said proudly during an interview in a juvenile detention center that he earns on a single Friday night more than his neighbors do carrying packages for a month. And he added petulantly that he was not born to be poor, because as the Mexican song says, he likes the good life ("Yo no nací pa' pobre, me gusta todo lo bueno...").”[6] This is an example of the contradiction of living in Caracas. If the boy were to follow society’s rules—hard work and savings--he would not obtain the end he wants; however, if he resorts to crime and violence he can obtain the ends he wants, which he could not have done in the formal economy. Just like when Tony Montana realizes he will not have the “good life” working in a legitimate business so he turns to crime, this boy at the beginning of the paragraph has a feeling of what he wants to have—probably from billboards and television—however, society does not provide the means to attain what it advertizes. This tension between the means and the ends in the Caracas is a primary driving force for crime. The population is advertized to, but the economy does not provide a legitimate way for the majority of the population to attain what the advertisements tell them they need to have. The resulting effects of a situation like this are crime, violence and drug trafficking.
Traditionally a city is considered the place of law where rights are upheld and respected and it is the countryside that is dangerous. However, this is not the case in Caracas. Since Chavez was elected in 1998, the murder rate in Caracas has increased more than twice, to 130 murders per 100,000 people.[7] A very high rate, which is actually higher because it omits people killed when “resisting arrest” or prison related killings.[8] This homicide rate even overshadows Columbia’s where there has been a decades long armed civil war and drug trafficking is rampant. The police force of Caracas—an institution charged to uphold the laws of a city and rights of its citizens—has become increasingly ill trained and poorly equipped since Chavez nationalized the city’s police force in 2002.[9] However, the problem has become much bigger over the years and simply rebuilding the police force would not be enough. A stronger police force would only create fiercer standoffs, which is never good, especially when a fraction of the murder count is due to police brutality.[10] There needs to be a major change from the top down; not just policy changes, but also, and more importantly, there needs to be a change in government discourse. Currently the Chavez administration’s discourse is: "…if you are lacking something it is because of injustice. Then look for it, take it away from those who have it. You can obtain justice with your own hands."[11] No matter what state society is in, a discourse of this nature only perpetuates the culture of violence and legitimates criminal acts. In the tangible realm i.e. in regard to the tools used to carry out actions within this discourse, the government is partly responsible for the number of weapons on the streets in Caracas because there is no gun control and gun permits are not required. These programs would at least restrict firearm movement in the country and hold owners accountable to their weapons. Once this happened, the country would be taking its first major step towards reducing the number of firearm related deaths.
When a city, like Caracas, has so many murders—if we think back to December 2009 when there were 510; that is 16.5 deaths per day—the lack of resources and a possible lack of skill in the Caracas police department is just not able to thoroughly investigate each case. In this type of situation fear of consequences for ones actions is not likely, killers are able to get away with murder, and they know it. The anonymity provided by the size of Caracas allows killers to mix in to the population and evade investigations. This is in contrast to the countryside where people know everyone in their vicinity by name. In fact, even with little to no police force, the mere fact that, in the countryside, everyone knows your identity and neighbors look out for neighbors, are likely reasons less crime is committed in rural areas with smaller populations.[12] Furthermore, in the countryside the tension between advertizing and not having the means to acquire advertized goods is taken away because advertising is not a heavy part of rural life, thus motivation for crime and violence is lessened. Judging by the crime rate, the Caracas police force does not effectively protect its citizens or uphold the law except for when upholding the law in the interest of Chavez i.e. repression of protest and opposition—in this, they have been effectual.
RECENT NEWS:
Despite the alarming murder and crime rates in Caracas, Chavez recently earmarked 1 billion dollars to fund the formation of civilian leadership groups that will be ordered to solve community problems from a grass roots perspective.[13] You, the reader, may think: “what do you mean ‘despite the alarming murder and crime rates’, the groups sound like a good thing? You would be right to ask that because it does sound great; until you read the following: the newly formed civilian groups will “…train in their own neighborhoods and will be equipped with any arms - guns, grenades, knifes - the community can provide. We have a right to defend ourselves, like the UK has, and be sure we'll do it." (Gen Alberto Mueller on April 16, 2010).[14] Chavez intends to hand out weapons to civilians in a society where the culture is mired with violence? To the average North American this is Lunacy! However, from Chavez’ perspective, this plan may be intended to create more violence towards capitalists and the wealthy to aid his Bolivarian revolution.
At the beginning of this blog, it was stated that, relative to other countries in Latin America, Venezuela is not known for having intense and ongoing political conflict; these recently announced armed civilian groups may be the beginning of such a scenario. The groups Chavez intends to form are voluntary and unlike the military, Chavez appoints the group leaders and decides on the allocation of funding.[15] This translates into Chavista groups poised for violence, most likely made up of the uneducated and poor and under the control of Chavez. It is likely that these groups will be used to repress political dissent. The middle and upper class must be very scared at the thought of armed socialist groups running around Caracas, training in broad daylight. This dangerous situation resembles that of the Red Guard during the Cultural Revolution in China of which, the results and numbers of deaths resulting from it were not favorable…further updates to come.
[1] Arthur Brice, "No surprise Caracas named 'murder capital of world'." CNN.com, December 31, 2008. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/12/31/Venezuela.murder.capital/(accessed March 28, 2010).
[2] Sara Miller Llana, "Will Venezuela's murder rate hurt Chávez?" Christian Science Monitor, December 3, 2008. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2008/1203/p06s01-woam.html (accessed April 15, 2010).
[3] Ibid.
[4] Arthur Brice.
[5] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Arthur Brice.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Alfonso Daniels, "Chávez arms community groups as he anticipates US invasion." Telegraph.co.uk, April 22, 2007. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1549349/Chavez-arms-community-groups-as-he-anticipates-US-invasion.html (accessed April 19, 2010).
[14] Ibid.
[15] Ibid.
Image source: AFP/Getty, Unamed, Stock Photos, Caravas, Venezuela http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/12/31/Venezuela.murder.capital/index.html (accessed April 18, 2010).
Earlier this year, on January 12, top officials in Caracas announced there would be electricity rationing lasting for at least 5 months and would affect everyone including schools and small health clinics; however the rationing would not affect large hospitals or important oil fields and refinery’s which have their own power generators.[1] The rationing comes after a failure to be able to produce enough electricity to meet the power demands of Venezuela. April 30, 2008 foreshadowed things to come; the Venezuela power grid failed due to “overload on a hot day” and the cities completely stalled; traffic congested as traffic lights were left powerless, communications were hampered, and industrial/oilfield productivity diminished.[2] This was the first example of major of power issues for the large cities of Venezuela and would not be the last.
The electrical issues in Caracas have been long in the making, but the current environmental conditions are nobody’s fault, not even Chavez’. The consensus among critics is that a large part of the problem is a lack of investment in electrical infrastructure since Chavez took control 11 years ago in 1999. The critics are correct, however, the reason that this lack of investment into electrical infrastructure has been brought to the forefront recently, is due to the worst drought Venezuela has seen in more than 50 years.[3] According to the country’s electricity grid manager, known as Opsis, Venezuela’s electricity consumption was 10,466 megawatts in November, with demand reaching 17,248 megawatts.[4] Herein, lies a great problem, in Caracas electrical consumption is the highest per-capita in Latin America mostly due to government subsidies, making electricity very cheap. However, part of the demand for electricity is not from superfluous uses, but from industry and commerce. As we know, oftentimes the measure of a countries electrical consumption is used to measure its progress and development. Chavez is holding back the development of his country’s economy by neglecting to ensure a viable method of electrical production. Granted, he may be concerned about the environmental effects of burning oil to produce electricity, but if the oil that is pumped from Venezuela’s depths is not utilized domestically, then the countries it is sold to will use the oil to their own advantage—would it not be better to keep a portion of the oil at home to create electricity and foster a more diverse and sustainable economy within Venezuela, one which does not rely almost entirely on oil exports?
This blog is being written at an important time in regard to Venezuela’s electrical issues. 73 percent of the electricity consumed in Caracas comes from the Guri hydroelectric dam, located in Bolivar state on the Caroni River. March 19, 2010: the drought has forced a drop in the Guri dam’s water level from its optimal level of 270 meters down to 252.42 meters above sea level.[5] The water level is dropping at approximately 15 centimeters per day—at this rate, if there are no new rains, the water level will reach the crisis point of 240 meters above sea level by early May.[6] As a precautionary measure, in February this year, the government initiated rolling blackouts throughout the country; even in the capital of Caracas there are often unexpected power outages and companies that do not reduce power usage by 20 percent are fined and temporarily shut down.[7] To add to the already tense atmosphere between the public and government, on January 14, Chavez announced that he would be retracting the plan that was announced only two days earlier to ration electricity for the following 5 months. With such a flip-flop move the government seemed indecisive and unstable; Chavez knew this and that is why he fired his electricity minister because “ the first day of rationing uncovered technical errors”.[8] What likely happened is that there were no technical problems, instead there was a lack of communication so people were losing power without knowing in advance and became very angry and frustrated. Chavez is afraid and aware of the ability for the electricity problems to cast a shadow over his leadership—already declining in popularity due to high levels of inflation.
Any amount of power rationing or power failures are detrimental to Caracas’s and Venezuela’s productivity; however, something must be done to maintain order and stability. If the water level at the Guri dam DOES drop below 240 meters above sea level, the productivity in Venezuela also drops, drastically. If the Guri dam fails to provide its 73 percent share of electrical production to Caracas and the rest of Venezuela, productivity falls the same percentage minus the various oil refineries that have their own power generators. When the power fails in Caracas, banking systems, debit card systems, telecommunications, cell phones, criminal databases, street lights, security cameras, gas pumps, air conditioners, refrigerators, etcetera…everything stops being connected and/or working when the power is out. Consider a family, unable to retrieve their savings from the bank or make a purchase with their debit or credit card, sitting in their sweltering hot home with the food in the refrigerator becoming rotten and no job to go to because the factories and stores are closed and no way to fuel their vehicle to leave the city. This type of situation would be highly primed for chaos.
In Caracas, it is likely that the aforementioned situation would not only result in looting and rioting but the political polarization between the classes would be softened and they may—for the time being—band together to fix their common problem (Chavez). Most of the blame would be directed at Chavez even though 85% of the population is in poverty—Chavez’ popular support base--they benefit from electricity too, even if it is only to keep streetlights on and water flowing. Chavez is surely weary of this fact because finally after two years of serious electricity problems, he has recently signed a deal with the leader of Russia, Prime Minister Putin, to gain nuclear energy.[9] This deal brings Moscow and Caracas ever closer in their effort to make a muti-polar world instead of US hegemony—further exemplified by the oil for arms deals between Russia and Venezuela. Also, to comfort the population’s electrical woes, Chavez has promised to install 4000 megawatts of new power production via thermoelectric power plants by the end of 2010, but analysts say that delays and difficulties in setting up the plants make the goal unrealistic.[10] This plan may be a little to late to save Chavez’ declining popularity, in September, we will see what the population truly thinks when they legislative election is held. A loss of majority could mean the political pendulum is swinging away from Chavez and towards the opposition. This type of shift would not cross to the right-wing because of the massive poor population, but definitely would prefer something slightly less radical and more concerned with the proper functioning of the country instead a sole focus on the demise of capitalism, no matter the costs.
At this point it looks like Chavez will just keep praying for rain on his weekly show Alo Presidante.[11] Meanwhile, the Guri dam water levels continue dropping and of course there has been no announcements made for a back up plan. This is not surprising because choices in the realm of Chavez are often impulsive and come unannounced; even once announced his plans fail or are turned back on and some poor minister of (insert department here), trying his very best, is fired to make up for it Chavez’ faults. Even if it does rain heavily
UPDATE: CHAVEZ’ PRAYERS ANSWERED, somewhat.
The Caracas newspaper El Universal, has reported that the rainy season has started in southern Venezuela and “the volume at Guri dam is gradually rising”. BUT, “optimum levels will take a long time, perhaps a couple of years.”[12] The rainy season, an annually occurring event—not God—has probably bought saved the Chavistas some votes at the polls, but electrical demand is still much higher than supply. A couple of years before the Guri dam is operating fully means that it will be important for Chavez to actually follow through with the installation of nuclear and thermo-electrical power plants, so that industry and the people are contented and he can remain in his role as dictator for a few more years. Until more power is scrounged up from somewhere, Caracas and all other cities are held back developmentally and poverty is further entrenched.
[1] Frank Jack Daniel, "Venezuela plans blackouts in Caracas, oil town." Reuters, January 12, 2010. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60B56Y20100112 (accessed April 12, 2010).
[2] Simon Romero, "Life Stalls in Venezuela as Power Shuts Off." New York Times, April 30, 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/30/world/americas/30VENEZ.html?fta=y (accessed April 20, 2010).
[3] Jose Orozco and Daniel Cancel, "Chavez Fires Minister for Faulty Caracas Blackout (Update4)." Bloomberg.com, January 14, 2010. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aBdfQ7cVH2BA (accessed April 19, 2010).
[4] Ibid.
[5] Darcy Crowe, "Water Worries Weigh on Venezuela ." The Wall Street Journal, March 19, 2010. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704059004575128563744733500.html (accessed April 12, 2010).
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Jose Orozco and Daniel Cancel.
[9] Associated Press, "Chavez: Russia Offers Venezuela Nuclear Help." Fox News.com, April 3, 2010. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/04/03/chavez-russia-offers-venezuela-nuclear-help/ (accessed April 19, 2010).
[10] Darcy Crowe.
[11] Darcy Crowe.
[12] Mariela León, "Recovery of Guri dam levels to take two years." El Universal, April 9,2010. http://english.eluniversal.com/2010/04/09/en_ing_esp_recovery-of-guri-dam_09A3718055.shtml (accessed April 13, 2010).
Image source: Carol, Semi-dim Bulb, The displaced african, Africans personal development blog, October, 2008 http://www.thedisplacedafrican.com/1622/when-the-deal-is-too-good-think-twice/ (accessed April 4, 2010).
