What do you think?
Rate this book
Barrio Rising: Urban Popular Politics and the Making of Modern Venezuela
Beginning in the late 1950s political leaders in Venezuela built what they celebrated as Latin America’s most stable democracy. But outside the staid halls of power, in the gritty barrios of a rapidly urbanizing country, another politics was rising―unruly, contentious, and clamoring for inclusion.
Based on years of archival and ethnographic research in Venezuela’s largest public housing community, Barrio Rising delivers the first in-depth history of urban popular politics before the Bolivarian Revolution, providing crucial context for understanding the democracy that emerged during the presidency of Hugo Chávez.
In the mid-1950s, a military government bent on modernizing Venezuela razed dozens of slums in the heart of the capital Caracas, replacing them with massive buildings to house the city’s working poor. The project remained unfinished when the dictatorship fell on January 23, 1958, and in a matter of days city residents illegally occupied thousands of apartments, squatted on green spaces, and renamed the neighborhood to honor the emerging the 23 de Enero (January 23).
During the next thirty years, through eviction efforts, guerrilla conflict, state violence, internal strife, and official neglect, inhabitants of el veintitrés learned to use their strategic location and symbolic tie to the promise of democracy in order to demand a better life. Granting legitimacy to the state through the vote but protesting its failings with violent street actions when necessary, they laid the foundation for an expansive understanding of democracy―both radical and electoral―whose features still resonate today.
Blending rich narrative accounts with incisive analyses of urban space, politics, and everyday life, Barrio Rising offers a sweeping reinterpretation of modern Venezuelan history as seen not by its leaders but by residents of one of the country’s most distinctive popular neighborhoods.
Based on years of archival and ethnographic research in Venezuela’s largest public housing community, Barrio Rising delivers the first in-depth history of urban popular politics before the Bolivarian Revolution, providing crucial context for understanding the democracy that emerged during the presidency of Hugo Chávez.
In the mid-1950s, a military government bent on modernizing Venezuela razed dozens of slums in the heart of the capital Caracas, replacing them with massive buildings to house the city’s working poor. The project remained unfinished when the dictatorship fell on January 23, 1958, and in a matter of days city residents illegally occupied thousands of apartments, squatted on green spaces, and renamed the neighborhood to honor the emerging the 23 de Enero (January 23).
During the next thirty years, through eviction efforts, guerrilla conflict, state violence, internal strife, and official neglect, inhabitants of el veintitrés learned to use their strategic location and symbolic tie to the promise of democracy in order to demand a better life. Granting legitimacy to the state through the vote but protesting its failings with violent street actions when necessary, they laid the foundation for an expansive understanding of democracy―both radical and electoral―whose features still resonate today.
Blending rich narrative accounts with incisive analyses of urban space, politics, and everyday life, Barrio Rising offers a sweeping reinterpretation of modern Venezuelan history as seen not by its leaders but by residents of one of the country’s most distinctive popular neighborhoods.
342 pages, Paperback
First published July 6, 2015
10 people are currently reading
308 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
January 28, 2025
Sometimes the most useful histories are those that keep a tight focus, and here Valasco keeps a very tight focus on the high rise housing developments that shaped Venezuelan politics for decades. I was drawn to this by the current situation in that country, in which many hopes have been betrayed. The book helps to understand the tangled nature of politics in Venezuela, the long history of both populism and betrayal, and the highly politicised culture. It is jammed with great anecdotes drawn from oral histories - one of my favourites is of student radicals organising out of the buildings, whose support from the locals comes more from parental concern than strong ideological agreement, being told to "leave the bombs at the door" as they are brought in for shelter.
I don't know what lies ahead for this country, but the book is a timely reminder of what has been survived and what the people, in the right conditions, can build.
I don't know what lies ahead for this country, but the book is a timely reminder of what has been survived and what the people, in the right conditions, can build.
November 27, 2023
A really good and insightful book. I have zero knowledge of Venezuelan history, and I learned so much from this book. Although, why were the chapters so long? No hate, it's just, that I felt like I was making no progress while reading.
One of the main things I enjoyed was the incorporation of testimonies from Venezuelan people, and how their experiences reflect the government in Venezuela, particularly 23 de Enero as a symbol of Venezuelan Democracy.
Anyways, superb and awesome book.
One of the main things I enjoyed was the incorporation of testimonies from Venezuelan people, and how their experiences reflect the government in Venezuela, particularly 23 de Enero as a symbol of Venezuelan Democracy.
Anyways, superb and awesome book.
Did not finish
May 23, 2024It’s very dry and I feel like I’m reading the information but not processing it if that makes sense 😂 it’s like in one ear and out the other so it’s a DNF for me. The true sign was that I preferred staring at the wall during a workout rather than continuing this book
March 19, 2026
Read half of this for class, insightful view into a truly grassroots movement and the dichotomy within the Venezuelan democracy of popular protest + electoral politics
_____
In Barrio Rising, Velasco challenges the traditional view of democracy by examining the way democratic spirit thrived on the streets of Venezuela in the years before Chávez. He narrows in on the 23 de Enero neighborhood, a contradictory emblem of democracy in the nation. It helped to found democracy, but at the same time is excluded from it. There, he demonstrates how the people understood democracy not just in the conventional sense of formal elections, but as “a political order that allows for dynamic participatory action, not always bound by rules, laws, or institutions” (1). Rather than at the state level, the people reinvented democracy from below. They created wholly grassroots activities that led them to become the most important political constituency in Venezuela, pursuing community-centered goals rather than ideologies and demanding recognition of their rights as citizens and inhabitants of the city. In particular, the hijackings in the 1980s was an effort at recalibrating the social and political spheres in Venezuela so that democracy and citizenship was understood as “an interplay of street action and the vote” (16). Through this lens, Velasco argues that the ideal of democracy should be reimagined. Instead of an “enlightened” representative democracy that steers away from the mob and into institutions, popular protest is an essential and complementary process of democracy. He says, “this form of mobilization that “employs both institutional and non-institutional tools” serves a crucial democratic function of “social accountability,” exerting pressure on government outside traditional mechanisms for articulating demands, seeking solutions, and redressing grievances” (12). The constant flux and dichotomy of interaction between formal and informal structures is a necessary mechanism for ensuring equality and representation in the system.
I found it interesting how the traditional view of democracy has been challenged multiple times in Latin America. Looking to Venezuela, the community only was successful at negotiating with the government when it put aside ideology to focus on the tangible and specific community goals at hand. I feel that a movement can be helped by an ideology if it aligns closely with the community, as was the case with the Zapatista movement during the Mexican Revolution. However, if there is not consensus it could further damage a movement’s unification and distort its aims, and it is less likely for the community to resolve its needs in a holistic way.
_____
In Barrio Rising, Velasco challenges the traditional view of democracy by examining the way democratic spirit thrived on the streets of Venezuela in the years before Chávez. He narrows in on the 23 de Enero neighborhood, a contradictory emblem of democracy in the nation. It helped to found democracy, but at the same time is excluded from it. There, he demonstrates how the people understood democracy not just in the conventional sense of formal elections, but as “a political order that allows for dynamic participatory action, not always bound by rules, laws, or institutions” (1). Rather than at the state level, the people reinvented democracy from below. They created wholly grassroots activities that led them to become the most important political constituency in Venezuela, pursuing community-centered goals rather than ideologies and demanding recognition of their rights as citizens and inhabitants of the city. In particular, the hijackings in the 1980s was an effort at recalibrating the social and political spheres in Venezuela so that democracy and citizenship was understood as “an interplay of street action and the vote” (16). Through this lens, Velasco argues that the ideal of democracy should be reimagined. Instead of an “enlightened” representative democracy that steers away from the mob and into institutions, popular protest is an essential and complementary process of democracy. He says, “this form of mobilization that “employs both institutional and non-institutional tools” serves a crucial democratic function of “social accountability,” exerting pressure on government outside traditional mechanisms for articulating demands, seeking solutions, and redressing grievances” (12). The constant flux and dichotomy of interaction between formal and informal structures is a necessary mechanism for ensuring equality and representation in the system.
I found it interesting how the traditional view of democracy has been challenged multiple times in Latin America. Looking to Venezuela, the community only was successful at negotiating with the government when it put aside ideology to focus on the tangible and specific community goals at hand. I feel that a movement can be helped by an ideology if it aligns closely with the community, as was the case with the Zapatista movement during the Mexican Revolution. However, if there is not consensus it could further damage a movement’s unification and distort its aims, and it is less likely for the community to resolve its needs in a holistic way.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews