Trying to Figure Out Chavez at the Comandante's London Vigil

I’m not sure what to make of deceased Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Anyone who sticks up for the little guy and goes out of their way to piss off Yankee imperialists in the charming, endearing way that he did is usually OK in my book. But then he had that whole demagogic shtick going on, and you get the sense that he had some of the cruellest dictators in human history on his Skype speed dial list, which I was obviously less comfortable with. And don't cults of personality always end in tears, anyway? I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere.

With that in mind, I decided to do what I always do when I’m ambivalent about a major political figure (which is frustratingly often): immerse myself among his staunchest supporters to see if get carried away on a wave of love, or repulsed by the unalloyed fawning. In this case, I attended a candlelit vigil for Chavez held in Belgrave Square, London, next to a statue of Simon Bolivar, the Latin American independence leader whose mantle and fight for social justice Chavez claimed to have taken up.

There were quite a few people holding candles and paying their respects. Tearful members of the Latin American diaspora rubbed shoulders with trade unionists and the type of people I assume Kelvin MacKenzie imagines all leftists to look like: students with Che Guevara paraphernalia and ageing communists who were visibly pining for the reincarnation and reinstatement of Leonid Brezhnev.

Alvaro Sánchez from the Venezuelan embassy took to the loud hailer and left us in no doubt about the near religious level of reverence he had for his late president, saying that, while it was sad he had died so young, “Even if he'd been 200 years old, [his death] would still have been unfair and sad for a man who did so much and had so much to do.”

When I later challenged him on Chavez’s accumulation of executive power, he said that it was simply the case that “Chavez was such a powerful, charismatic figure – so large and overwhelming and so loved – that his image governed Venezuelan society.” He also dismissed reports about increasing levels of violence in Venezuela as “out of context” because there has always been violence there, although he admitted that there was a problem. Finally, he downplayed the possibility that Venezuela will be less stable without Chavez. He was pretty media savvy, not giving me any of the dramatic predictions of a geo-political earthquake I was hoping for to liven up my evening.

Alvaro’s speech was followed by those of diplomats from Latin American countries, trade unionists and activists. But despite two loud speakers, sound problems made all of those speeches pretty inaudible, so I decided to go and ask some of the glum mourners what they thought instead.

VICE: Hi Jacquelin, why do you “amo” Chavez?
Jacquelin, 51: When I lived in Venezuela, things were very different. There was lots of discrimination and the government didn't help anyone in need. Health, transport, education – everything was bad. Chavez managed to improve everything and change people’s way of seeing things. He made the most uneducated people aware of their rights as human beings. Every time I go back, it's got better.

Can "Chavismo" survive without Chavez?
Definitely. He awakened people. Like he said, there was not one Chavez, but many.

Do you reckon the US will try to destabilise Venezuela now?
The only thing they could do is make Venezuelans fight between each other and start a civil war. That way they could get involved with the excuse that they have to introduce order to the country.

VICE: Hi Jeremy. What brought you here?
Jeremy Corbyn, Labour Party MP: I’ve been inspired by a leader in the world who stood up for a different way of doing things and changed Latin America forever. History, I think, will be very kind to Chavez.

What can we learn from Chavez?
That it’s possible to be politically strong and popular with a programme based on work for everybody and education for all, rather than widening the gap between the richest and the poorest. I was in a debate with somebody yesterday who said that Chavez had bribed his way into power. I said, “How did he do that?” He said, “He gave jobs to the poor and nationalised all the industries.” So I said, “If only we could do that here!”

Solid comeback. Wouldn’t you be the first to complain, though, if David Cameron concentrated power in his own hands in the way that Chavez did?
David Cameron has the same executive power as Chavez has. Greater powers, in fact. Was Chavez a powerful, charismatic leader? Yes. Should there be a strong parliament to control the executive? Yes, and the Venezuelan constitution provides that. What went before Chavez was pretty awful – stuff like regular human rights abuses and the shooting of workers on strike.

What about Chavez being friendly to some pretty dodgy people – Mugabe, Gaddafi and Ahmadinejad, among others?
I think those making those criticisms should examine themselves first. American administrations have embraced dictators from Pinochet to Marcos to Suharto. The idea that Chavez forming alliances with these people means he’s the same as them doesn’t stand up, because in the elections last year nobody could find anything wrong – nobody disputed the result.

Okay, so he’s not a Mugabe figure and the West props up some arseholes, but you’re here venerating someone who was friends with tyrants. Is that OK?
We’re venerating somebody who changed the politics of Latin America to a pro-poor direction. I have criticisms of some of the countries he had dealings with, but one has to recognise the massive contribution that he made. His legacy will be that, for ever more, the poor and dispossessed of Latin America will be reckoned with rather than ignored.

VICE: Why are you a Chavez fan?
Anne Johnson, Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist): Chavez was obviously doing some tremendous things, despite all the silliness that the bourgeois media likes to come out with. Internationally, he was on the side of peace – pro-Iran, pro-Syria, against the attacks on China and Russia.

Yeah, pro-Iran and he said some nice things about Robert Mugabe and Idi Amin, too. Is that good?
Robert Mugabe is trying to get land for the people. From our point of view, the news is all lies.

Mugabe has undeniably had opponents beaten up and killed.
I don't know about this “undeniably”. He’s in government and has to defend that against terrorism. He was a freedom fighter who was imprisoned and he’s doing great things now, but you’re not going to get that from the media. You have to dig behind the lies, like with North Korea.

I’m getting the impression that any despot who pisses off the West is beyond reproach in your eyes.
As Mao said, you have to look for the main contradiction. Who is the main enemy? Satan? The donkey? No, America! They’re the ones doing all the wars.

Yeah, but you seem to be supporting a dictatorship in Iran. I’m pretty sure Iran is a pretty repressive place to live. 
But why do you say that? You’ve been brainwashed! I watch Press TV [run by the Iranian government] and I know that the people are behind the government. What I like about the Iranians and their religion is that it’s ethical. The women on TV look sober and they behave ethically; not like the stupid freedom of the West – sexuality, pornography!

I think we got kind of sidetracked from Chavez. Anyway, bye.

VICE: You look sad.
Elizabeth Santander: I’m here because I feel very sad. I think Chavez was the best leader in the world. We can learn a lot from him, especially love for everyone.

Are you from Venezuela?
No, Colombia.

Why is he important to Latin America outside of Venezuela?
He gave us an example because he lowered poverty and made education free. I admire that he didn’t have to pick up a weapon to get what he wanted. He was a soldier of the people.

Well, he was part of a military coup in 1992, but I get your point.

VICE: Solidarity from Nicaragua, why so?
Blanca, student from Nicaragua: Nicaragua has always been right behind Chavez and he supported Nicaragua, too. In Nicaragua, the Sandinista Party – a socialist party – has been in power since 2006.

Now that Chavez is gone, is the Bolivarian revolution gone?
I hope our presidents will keep uniting and enhancing what he did.

Do you think the US will try to destabilise things?
I think they'll try. They will try to unsettle things to regain control over the area, but hopefully we'll remain steady and it won’t happen.

Did the US give Chavez cancer?
I’m a scientist, so no, I don’t think it’s possible. Having said that, it’s possible they could have developed some sort of biological warfare. I’m undecided.

That’s very open-minded of you.

VICE: When were you last in Venezuela?
Patricia, student: I went there in October for the elections.

Have you personally been affected by Chavez’s rule?
I have family from Barinas, where Chavez is from. They didn’t have a decent house until Chavez constructed one for them.

Will Chavismo continue without Chavez?
We’ll follow [vice president] Maduro. Chavez built the basis for the revolution and now we have to carry that on. America might try to come in now, but we're not going to let them. We're going to follow Chavez's dream.

How do you think they’ll do that?
They’ll intervene by any means. Maybe they’ll send planes to spy.

Spy planes?
They’ll do whatever. Maybe they’ll support the right-wing opposition at the next elections.

Yeah, that would probably make more sense than spy planes. Do you think America gave Chavez cancer?
We can’t say that now. More research has to be done, but it’s probable.

Do you agree with Iranian president Ahmadinejad who said that Chavez will return on resurrection day along with Jesus?
Maybe!

Alright then!

Follow Simon on Twitter: @simonchilds13

More Chavez: 

Can Chavismo Survive Without Chavez?

Chavez: Despot or Saint?

Vaya Con Dios, Hugo