November 18, 2014

Further Readings on Dawson, Chapter 1: "Independence Narratives, Past and Present"


The independence narratives of Simón Bolívar and José Martí are crucial to the understanding of modern politics in Latin America. Their visions of independent nations in solidarity against Spanish imperial control is reflected in Hugo Chávez's and Fidel Castro's struggle for autonomy from the United States and domestic dictators. These populist leaders call on independence heroes to strengthen their narratives and maintain their power. By way of this process, the legacies of Bolívar and Martí are kept alive. All four of these individuals are highly controversial, therefore the framing of the media's perspective of them is essential to criticize.

Source 1: Post, Jerrold M. "“El Fenomeno Chavez:” Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Modern Day Bolivar."The Counterproliferation Papers 39 (2007): ii-38. Print.

            "El Fenomeno Chavez" is a report by Jerrold Post, a professor of political psychology at the George Washington University in the United States. It is a fifty page document analyzing Hugo Chávez's invocation of Simón Bolívar as the president of Venezuela. It is heavily bias towards the American media's representation of Chávez as a dictator of a non-democratic nation from the far left. However, the document gives an enlightening analysis of the psychological manipulation Chávez arguably subjected the Venezuelan public by calling on Latin America's most esteemed independence war hero, Simón Bolívar.

            Chávez is framed by Post as a manipulative political mastermind. One who knew very well the popular support he would receive by channeling Bolívar. He is painted as a unilateral leader that silenced opposition parties by revising the constitution and creating his personal media mediums, such as his own TV show. Post argues that Chávez managed to manipulate the public, violate the constitution, pass undemocratic laws, and maintain presidency by masking his actions with his charismatic personality and his advocacy for the poor. Post makes a direct attack at this "myth" by diagnosing him as having a narcissistic personality. He sharply states:
Chavez is an authoritarian narcissistic leader who has dreams of glory, and can be overly sensitive to criticism. The arrogant certainty conveyed in his public pronouncements is very appealing to his followers. But under this grandiose facade, as is typical with    narcissistic personalities, is extreme insecurity. (12)
Therefore, due to Chávez's psychological condition, he blames others for his own mal-doing. By stating the above not only does Post undermine Chávez's charm, but he undermines his political stance against the United States, the significance of the Bolivarian Revolution and his competency as a leader. He frames Chávez's position as a symptom of his psychological problem; a consequence of his mental capacity and not a validated revolutionary struggle against imperial powers. Chávez is, thus, rendered as an inadequate leader and his criticisms of the States as ludicrous.   

            At the general assembly of the United Nations in 2007, Chávez “ [referred] to President George W. Bush who had addressed the U.N. general assembly the day before, stated, 'The devil came here yesterday [. . .] And it smells of sulfur still today.' [. . .] He also stated that the United States was “the first enemy” of its people” (26-27). There is a resemblance between Chávez's passage and the following passage from Bolíva's popular “Jamaican Letter” written in 1815. Bolívar writes, “We have already seen the light, and it is not our desire to be thrust back into darkness. The chains have been broken; we have been freed, and now our enemies [Spain] seek to enslave us anew” (doc 1.1 in Dawson, 22). They both use powerful allusions, they demonize the hegemonic power and Other it as the enemy of the state. Post captures Chavez's use of rhetoric as a strategy to embezzle and awe to increase enthusiasm: “Chavez has cultivated a larger-than-life self-image, approaching messianic proportions, yet is not out of touch with political reality. However, at times he seems to become captive of his own inflammatory rhetoric” (12).  

            Chávez's success is due to his crafting of his self as an image, an ideal, an idea backed by military action and supported by populist legacy. He is able to do this by channeling the idea of Bolívar. Hugo Chávez intentionally embodied Simón Bolívar's personality and ideologies to help him rise to and maintain power for 14 years (2). Jerrold Post puts it in harsher terms:
Hugo Chavez is a skilled political manipulator, who is adroitly Machiavellian. His continual emphasis of his mission of championing of Bolivarian ideals, his oft stated pride in his being a mestizo, and his continuing emphasis on his own roots in poverty is employed to maintain his hold on power. (15)
It is predominately Chávez's active adoption of Bolívar's personable personality traits, political ambitions and ideologies, deft ability to entertain, and legacy that wielded Chávez's popularity among the members of the Bolivarian cult. Chávez's  invocation of Bolívar is not Bolívar as a man in his exclusivity, but as an idea that can be used as a political tool for ulterior motives.

Source 2: Castro, Fidel. "Excerpts from "History Will Absolve Me"" Trans. Richard Slatta. (n.d.): n. pag. College Cengage. Web. <http://college.cengage.com/history/world/keen/latin_america/8e/assets/students/sources/pdfs/87_fidel_castro.pdf>.

            In October 1953, Fidel Castro gave a four hour speech in his own defense after the attacks on the Moncada Barracks. Castro’s defense was an attempt to attach his name to the great independence hero of his country, José Martí. It was arguably successful given that he became the Prime Minister of Cuba and remained so until his health deemed him incapable. This speech makes it clear that he is against the Batista dictatorship and their neglect of the poor agricultural inhabitants of Cuba. Castro stresses the importance of equal access to education and land rights. It reads like a manifesto for the revolution he advocates and the rights of the people. But, most importantly, he stresses the required solidarity of all citizens of Cuba, and the locked potential of the country (nature and state).  

            In the sixth enumerated revolutionary law, Castro states:
Furthermore, it was to be declared that Cuban policy in the Americas would be one of close solidarity with the democratic peoples of this continent, and that those politically persecuted by bloody tyrants opposing our sister nations would find generous asylum, brotherhood and bread in the land of Martí; not the persecution and treason they find today. Cuba should be the bulwark of liberty and not a shameful link in the chain of despotism. (5)
Castro is advocating for Cuba's rightful place to be that of the liberators and upholders of democracy for Latin American nations. He is drawing upon Martí's more succinct and poetical call from "Our America", "Let the world be grafted onto our republics, but we must be the trunk" (doc 1.2 in Dawson, 27).  Castro speaks to Cuba as the "land of Martí". While Martí referred to Cuba as the land of those who inhabit it and as the spirit of the nation, Castro has taken Martí and made him into the embodiment of his ideas. Thus, the "the land of Martí" refers to the independent, fully flourished, and local perseverance of the land and its people. Castro continues, "The greatness and prosperity of our country depends on the healthy and vigorous rural population that loves the land and knows how to till it, within the framework of a State that protects and guides them" (5). This echoes Marti's powerful phrase, "Let the heart’s fires unfreeze all that is motionless in America, and let the country’s natural blood surge and throb through its veins!" (Dawson, 29). Martí, here, is summoning the local, national potential of the land and those who are most intimitate with it, the farmers, to rise and become active in their own production, as Castro does in his words.


            Castro has a sincere devotion to Martí revolutionary struggle and has channeled in his own revolution. He perceives his efforts as a fulfillment of Martí's cause. The attack on Batista of which he is being charged were valiant acts of heroism in his name and wishes to be commemorated as such. Castro ends his speech with “Condemn me, it does not matter. History will absolve me!” (6). This speech is more than just a defense, it his successful attempt to win over the people by channeling a national independence hero from Cuban history. 

No comments:

Post a Comment