What do you think?
Rate this book
La Révolution au Venezuela. Une histoire populaire
Since being elected president in 1998, Hugo Chávez has become the face of contemporary Venezuela and, more broadly, anticapitalist revolution. George Ciccariello-Maher contends that this focus on Chávez has obscured the inner dynamics and historical development of the country’s Bolivarian Revolution. In We Created Chávez, by examining social movements and revolutionary groups active before and during the Chávez era, Ciccariello-Maher provides a broader, more nuanced account of Chávez’s rise to power and the years of activism that preceded it.Based on interviews with grassroots organizers, former guerrillas, members of neighborhood militias, and government officials, Ciccariello-Maher presents a new history of Venezuelan political activism, one told from below. Led by leftist guerrillas, women, Afro-Venezuelans, indigenous people, and students, the social movements he discusses have been struggling against corruption and repression since 1958. Ciccariello-Maher pays particular attention to the dynamic interplay between the Chávez government, revolutionary social movements, and the Venezuelan people, recasting the Bolivarian Revolution as a long-term and multifaceted process of political transformation.
368 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2013
27 people are currently reading
641 people want to read
About the author
George Ciccariello-Maher
12 books59 followersGeorge Ciccariello-Maher is Associate Professor of Politics and Global Studies at Drexel University in Philadelphia. He is the author of We Created Chávez: A People’s History of the Venezuelan Revolution, and Decolonizing Dialectics.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
November 5, 2018
A very important and thought-provoking study of the Venezuelan Revolution to date (well, to the time of the book's publication in 2013).
Ciccariello-Maher does an outstanding job of presenting a "people's history", focused not on charismatic leaders but on the actions of the masses of the people, most notably in the popular (and brutally repressed) rebellion of 1989 (the Caracazo) and the defeat of the 2002 coup. The book also places the Bolivarian Revolution - with its official start date of 1998, with the election of Hugo Chávez as president - in historical context, linking it up with the guerrilla and activist movements of the 1960s and 1970s, the black and indigenous struggles, the women's movement, the land question, and more. Ciccariello-Maher goes even further back into Venezuelan history to find the links between the modern socialist movement and the early anti-colonial struggles.
Although it's an indispensable history, I'm not 100% convinced by the political conclusions, which perhaps tend towards an ultra-left understanding of the state. While popular militia and barrio-level revolutionary committees are essential for defending the gains of the last two decades against a vicious and borderline-insane Venezuelan economic elite, it's highly contentious to consider this as a system of 'dual power', one in which the 'from below' power comes to dominate and the 'from above' power 'withers away'. The most obvious problem with this analysis is that it ignores the very serious threat that Venezuela faces from outside: as a socialist-oriented state it is very much a target for US overt and covert operations, and the militarised right-wing US-friendly regime in Colombia makes this threat all too real. In such a regional environment, decentralisation of the state is a risky business. IMHO the book could have been more nuanced/balanced in its treatment of this issue.
Ciccariello-Maher does an outstanding job of presenting a "people's history", focused not on charismatic leaders but on the actions of the masses of the people, most notably in the popular (and brutally repressed) rebellion of 1989 (the Caracazo) and the defeat of the 2002 coup. The book also places the Bolivarian Revolution - with its official start date of 1998, with the election of Hugo Chávez as president - in historical context, linking it up with the guerrilla and activist movements of the 1960s and 1970s, the black and indigenous struggles, the women's movement, the land question, and more. Ciccariello-Maher goes even further back into Venezuelan history to find the links between the modern socialist movement and the early anti-colonial struggles.
Although it's an indispensable history, I'm not 100% convinced by the political conclusions, which perhaps tend towards an ultra-left understanding of the state. While popular militia and barrio-level revolutionary committees are essential for defending the gains of the last two decades against a vicious and borderline-insane Venezuelan economic elite, it's highly contentious to consider this as a system of 'dual power', one in which the 'from below' power comes to dominate and the 'from above' power 'withers away'. The most obvious problem with this analysis is that it ignores the very serious threat that Venezuela faces from outside: as a socialist-oriented state it is very much a target for US overt and covert operations, and the militarised right-wing US-friendly regime in Colombia makes this threat all too real. In such a regional environment, decentralisation of the state is a risky business. IMHO the book could have been more nuanced/balanced in its treatment of this issue.
March 31, 2017
Reading Ciccarello-Maher's "We Created Chavez", it gave me the impression of a high school child's sentence, using too many adjectives, passive construction, and imprecise language writing.
It's crap.
He's not a scholar
He's not an impressive writer
He's child like.
2 stars, because the book was useful as toilet paper when the economy tanked here in Venezuela
It's crap.
He's not a scholar
He's not an impressive writer
He's child like.
2 stars, because the book was useful as toilet paper when the economy tanked here in Venezuela
July 27, 2016
I wanted to like this book more than I eventually did. It got too bogged down in the details of the various activists and guerrillas and their various movements and the divisions of all the movements. So I often lost track of the broader argument about the importance of social movements and people power in Venezuela. He talked about the too common focus on just Chavez while looking at Venezuela, but I feel like the title fell into the same trap. It's valuable for looking at the range of activist sectors in Venezuela - women, working class, labor, campesino, etc - but the divisions among movements often lead to divisions in the book's coherency
September 14, 2017
Read this book if you want to understand what is happening in Venezuela, even though the book was completed shortly before Chavez died. What the author does is explain in patient detail how the Bolivarian movement gets its impetus from the grassroots. This is no one-man revolution, or driven only by Chavez. Rather it is the product of many years of struggle on the ground, with the coming to power of Chavez's government a product of grassroots movements, not the other way around. Since then, the movement has gone forward due to pressure from below as Chavez's government navigated through several currents of opinion. This is a well researched account that should be read with an open mind.
April 28, 2019
GCM's people's history of the Bolivarian Revolution is even-handed and complex and is a great start to understanding this process in Venezuelan history. Highly informative and so dense, GCM highlights the struggles often intentionally obfuscated from the US news consumer. I think GCM particularly comes to a crescendo in the conclusion, where they write:
"So, we must move beyond the naive dichotomy of pro-Chavez or anti-Chavez to say, alongside the mot revolutionary segments of Venezuelan society, that we support Chavez as long as he supports the revolution; or, to paraphrase this most complex of all figures in contemporary Venezuela, turning his own words into a threat and a promise: Chavez, we are with you, pero por ahora, only for now."
I think that a critique may be that GCM is too romantic in their language, but I believe that GCM is interesting and if they were to write with less romanticism, fewer flowery adjectives and adverbs, and fewer references to quotes of Castro and Che, it would make this 255 page tome all the more difficult to read (it still took me a month to read).
"So, we must move beyond the naive dichotomy of pro-Chavez or anti-Chavez to say, alongside the mot revolutionary segments of Venezuelan society, that we support Chavez as long as he supports the revolution; or, to paraphrase this most complex of all figures in contemporary Venezuela, turning his own words into a threat and a promise: Chavez, we are with you, pero por ahora, only for now."
I think that a critique may be that GCM is too romantic in their language, but I believe that GCM is interesting and if they were to write with less romanticism, fewer flowery adjectives and adverbs, and fewer references to quotes of Castro and Che, it would make this 255 page tome all the more difficult to read (it still took me a month to read).
March 30, 2018
Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution is movement of millions much bigger than Hugo Chávez. This a movement that can’t be understood without a bottom-up perspective, without analysis of the pressure from below that buffeted Chávez, pushed forward by organizations that support the revolution. We Created Chávez provides that necessary background for a movement that began years before Chávez first won election and continues after his death.
The modern history of Venezuela is that of regularly employed workers, informal workers, peasants, students, women, Afro-Venezuelans and Indigenous peoples in a many-sided struggle against domestic elites and the country’s subaltern status in global capitalism. Then there is the struggle within the Bolivarian Revolution. There are tensions between economic and political demands, between workers’ autonomy and the state, over the nature and content of “co-management” and over if co-management is a step toward a higher level or a capitalist trick, as well as opposition to developing the Bolivarian process from managers and within the ranks of the movement.
That Chávez is gone from the scene and Venezuela is now struggling with an escalating multitude of problems does not render this book in any way out of date. I found it indispensable toward understanding the process that is the Bolivarian Revolution and the path taken by Venezuela.
The modern history of Venezuela is that of regularly employed workers, informal workers, peasants, students, women, Afro-Venezuelans and Indigenous peoples in a many-sided struggle against domestic elites and the country’s subaltern status in global capitalism. Then there is the struggle within the Bolivarian Revolution. There are tensions between economic and political demands, between workers’ autonomy and the state, over the nature and content of “co-management” and over if co-management is a step toward a higher level or a capitalist trick, as well as opposition to developing the Bolivarian process from managers and within the ranks of the movement.
That Chávez is gone from the scene and Venezuela is now struggling with an escalating multitude of problems does not render this book in any way out of date. I found it indispensable toward understanding the process that is the Bolivarian Revolution and the path taken by Venezuela.
December 8, 2013
Interesting.
March 27, 2020
L'objectif de l'auteur George Ciccariello-Maher dans cette histoire populaire des luttes au Venezuela est de décentraliser le chavisme de Chávez lui-même en retournant aux racines insurrectionnelles bolivariennes dès la chute de la dictature en 1958 à laquelle succède une démocratie parlementaire aux seules mains de l'oligarchie raciste et extrêmement brutale (Pacte de Puntofijo) mais invisibilisée par une narration historique qui ne met que l'accent sur la stabilité exemplaire du Venezuela au coeur de l'Amérique du Sud des années 60 à 90.
Pour cet objectif, il retient plusieurs dates-clefs de cristallisation de la colère populaire et des moyens révolutionnaires par lesquels elle a essayé et même finalement triomphé des fascistes et de la bourgeoisie réactionnaire : 1989 = avec la révolte spontanée du Caracazo (qu'il analyse comme le 1er sursaut au monde contre le néo-libéralisme et le prémice de la tentative ratée d'accéder au pouvoir en 1992 par Chávez), 2002 = quand le peuple s'organisa contre le coup d'Etat contre Chávez avec brio jusqu'à 2010 = avec loi sur les communes qui refuse l'enlisement gouvernementaliste du projet bolivarien.
Par une série d'entretiens rares et précieux avec des acteurs et actrices (parfois dans la clandestinité) de cette longue révolution, il interroge les dilemmes stratégiques qui ont marqué les décennies précédant l'arrivée de Chávez au pouvoir : entre les erreurs lourdes du foquismo à la Guevara et Debray dans la topographie et la répartition démographique particulière du pays, la retraite du terrain de l'université bourgeoise par les étudiant-e-s révolutionnaires à la fin des années 80, la difficile mise en place d'un syndicalisme révolutionnaire à même de concurrencer le syndicalisme véreux et allié historique de la bourgeoisie républicaine, l'ouvrage ne cherche jamais à juger les principales et principaux protagonistes d'alors mais de montrer plutôt comment leurs choix ont affecté le cadre de la lutte et l'ont amené à toujours se repenser.
Dans le cadre des avancées révolutionnaires permises par le tournant de 1998, il démontre avec talent que c'est bien la pression populaire qui radicalisa et cadra les mandats historiques de Chávez et que cette révolution est bien plus une oeuvre collective qu'individuelle portée par un seul homme providentiel et charismatique. S'il s'est avéré une condition de la réussite collective, il ne fut jamais le prétexte d'une démission populaire car le peuple reste l'acteur principal de la survie d'une révolution bolivarienne réelle et ce, même depuis l'arrivée de Maduro.
Ainsi, Ciccariello-Maher ne se refuse pas à observer l'équilibre parfois tenu par exemple entre le gouvernement et les paysan-ne-s sans terre, qui n'ont eu de cesse de contraindre le gouvernement chaviste à aller plus loin dans sa réforme agraire permise par la Ley de Tierras en 2001 (seule 30% de son contenu est appliqué) puis par la mission Zamora en 2005 contre l'hégémonie des grands propriétaires terriens et les violences de leur riposte. L'auteur n'oublie pas non plus de montrer les limites du marxisme orthodoxe, prêt à dégainer des lectures inadaptées aux réalités venezueliennes comme l'appellation "lumpen" à caractère souvent élitiste et raciste, en réhabilitant les buhoneros comme principaux-les acteur-trice-s des mobilisations spontanées victorieuses contre le coup d'Etat de 2002 mais figures encore "impensé-e-s" de l'analyse de classe en tant que travailleur-se-s informel-le-s.
Il ne néglige pas non plus la spécificité des luttes afro-indigènes d'où ressort une nécessaire autonomie face à l'aveuglement à la race même des chavistes blanc-he-s quand l'idéologie du métissage sert encore de déni du racisme systémique persistant. C'est également l'un des points de rupture radicale avec le camp de droite qui ne ne s'embarrasse pas d'une négrophobie ouverte allant jusqu'à l'appel au meurtre contre "les singes".
Le cadre de la constitution bolivarienne a également nourri l'espoir d'une véritable prise en compte des femmes en terme de droits humains, économiques et politiques. Mais s'opposent deux tendances principales dans le camp gauchiste féministe : les féministes chavistes et les autonomistes pures. On reproche aux premières d'être inféodées à un gouvernement trop lent sur ses questions et pudibond vis-à-vis du poids de l'Eglise, aux autres de jouer le jeu de l'opposition ou de se caler sur un agenda féministe occidental. Elles ne se rejoignent que sur la conclusion qu'une révolution ne peut qu'être antiraciste et féministe, de même une société féministe et antiraciste ne peut qu'advenir que dans le cadre du dépassement du capitalisme.
Sans plus développer ces points ici, j'ai beaucoup apprécié les réflexions autour de la lutte anti-drogue dans les barrios comme point de départ des mouvements de milices populaires, les références constantes des Venezuelien-ne-s à la Commune mais aussi aux cumbes, le portrait rééclairé de Manuela Sáenz (maîtresse de Simón Bolívar et libératrice du Libertador), la mise en place d'un salaire domestique (article 88 de la réforme de la Constitution bolivarienne), l'évolution sémantique politique de "caribe" (issu du peuple Karaïbe), les citations du chanteur révolutionnaire Alí Primera, le choix du dépassement de la seule revendication ouvrière de nationalisation pour l'expropriation et l'autogestion contre un syndicalisme traditionnel corrompu et bourgeois. Le second interlude "tout 11 a son 13" décrypte quant à lui la violence de classe à l'oeuvre à travers les médias venezueliens lors de la tentative ratée de putsch en 1992. Les analyses de Gramsci sur l'hégémonie, du Fanon des Damnés de la terre, de Lénine sur la nature de l'Etat dans la révolution, de Régis Debray sur la lutte armée en Amérique latine sont constamment mises à contribution même si nuancées.
Cet essai d'histoire contemporaine se clôt sur deux problématiques passionnantes, le communalisme et l'armée populaire, caractéristiques de la volonté libertaire venezuelienne de ne pas réifier d'Etat bourgeois et répressif, en multipliant les zones de pouvoir direct populaire, à même de repenser voire légitimer le recours à la violence révolutionnaire d'autodéfense (ou non) pour se séparer progressivement du modèle de monopole de la violence par l'Etat permise par le verticalisme autoritaire propre à l'armée traditionnelle.
De même, le projet bolivarien met un point d'honneur à ne pas reproduire le centralisme bureaucratique en décalage complet avec les réalités paysannes ou celles des barrios de Caracas. L'ouvrage qui succède à We created Chávez de l'auteur, Building the commune : radical democracy in Venezuela, doit certainement permettre de développer encore plus cet aspect fondamental. En espérant que la Fabrique ou une autre maison d'éditions française puisse le traduire également... Pour oim en tout cas hihi.
Ciccariello-Maher se permet un mea culpa en postface de l'édition française, sur l'absence remarquable de Chávez dans son livre, ombre mais non-acteur du récit, alors que depuis sa disparition, la révolution bolivarienne est plus que jamais menacée... Le Venezuela est-il d'ores et déjà en mesure de se passer d'un-e leader charismatique pour défendre ses intérêts à l'échelle communale, régionale, nationale et internationale ? Les mal nommé-e-s chavistes (disons les comuneros) répondraient peut-être oui, ce leader existe déjà et il s'appelle el pueblo (à qui est dédié l'ouvrage).
Pour cet objectif, il retient plusieurs dates-clefs de cristallisation de la colère populaire et des moyens révolutionnaires par lesquels elle a essayé et même finalement triomphé des fascistes et de la bourgeoisie réactionnaire : 1989 = avec la révolte spontanée du Caracazo (qu'il analyse comme le 1er sursaut au monde contre le néo-libéralisme et le prémice de la tentative ratée d'accéder au pouvoir en 1992 par Chávez), 2002 = quand le peuple s'organisa contre le coup d'Etat contre Chávez avec brio jusqu'à 2010 = avec loi sur les communes qui refuse l'enlisement gouvernementaliste du projet bolivarien.
Par une série d'entretiens rares et précieux avec des acteurs et actrices (parfois dans la clandestinité) de cette longue révolution, il interroge les dilemmes stratégiques qui ont marqué les décennies précédant l'arrivée de Chávez au pouvoir : entre les erreurs lourdes du foquismo à la Guevara et Debray dans la topographie et la répartition démographique particulière du pays, la retraite du terrain de l'université bourgeoise par les étudiant-e-s révolutionnaires à la fin des années 80, la difficile mise en place d'un syndicalisme révolutionnaire à même de concurrencer le syndicalisme véreux et allié historique de la bourgeoisie républicaine, l'ouvrage ne cherche jamais à juger les principales et principaux protagonistes d'alors mais de montrer plutôt comment leurs choix ont affecté le cadre de la lutte et l'ont amené à toujours se repenser.
Dans le cadre des avancées révolutionnaires permises par le tournant de 1998, il démontre avec talent que c'est bien la pression populaire qui radicalisa et cadra les mandats historiques de Chávez et que cette révolution est bien plus une oeuvre collective qu'individuelle portée par un seul homme providentiel et charismatique. S'il s'est avéré une condition de la réussite collective, il ne fut jamais le prétexte d'une démission populaire car le peuple reste l'acteur principal de la survie d'une révolution bolivarienne réelle et ce, même depuis l'arrivée de Maduro.
Ainsi, Ciccariello-Maher ne se refuse pas à observer l'équilibre parfois tenu par exemple entre le gouvernement et les paysan-ne-s sans terre, qui n'ont eu de cesse de contraindre le gouvernement chaviste à aller plus loin dans sa réforme agraire permise par la Ley de Tierras en 2001 (seule 30% de son contenu est appliqué) puis par la mission Zamora en 2005 contre l'hégémonie des grands propriétaires terriens et les violences de leur riposte. L'auteur n'oublie pas non plus de montrer les limites du marxisme orthodoxe, prêt à dégainer des lectures inadaptées aux réalités venezueliennes comme l'appellation "lumpen" à caractère souvent élitiste et raciste, en réhabilitant les buhoneros comme principaux-les acteur-trice-s des mobilisations spontanées victorieuses contre le coup d'Etat de 2002 mais figures encore "impensé-e-s" de l'analyse de classe en tant que travailleur-se-s informel-le-s.
Il ne néglige pas non plus la spécificité des luttes afro-indigènes d'où ressort une nécessaire autonomie face à l'aveuglement à la race même des chavistes blanc-he-s quand l'idéologie du métissage sert encore de déni du racisme systémique persistant. C'est également l'un des points de rupture radicale avec le camp de droite qui ne ne s'embarrasse pas d'une négrophobie ouverte allant jusqu'à l'appel au meurtre contre "les singes".
Le cadre de la constitution bolivarienne a également nourri l'espoir d'une véritable prise en compte des femmes en terme de droits humains, économiques et politiques. Mais s'opposent deux tendances principales dans le camp gauchiste féministe : les féministes chavistes et les autonomistes pures. On reproche aux premières d'être inféodées à un gouvernement trop lent sur ses questions et pudibond vis-à-vis du poids de l'Eglise, aux autres de jouer le jeu de l'opposition ou de se caler sur un agenda féministe occidental. Elles ne se rejoignent que sur la conclusion qu'une révolution ne peut qu'être antiraciste et féministe, de même une société féministe et antiraciste ne peut qu'advenir que dans le cadre du dépassement du capitalisme.
Sans plus développer ces points ici, j'ai beaucoup apprécié les réflexions autour de la lutte anti-drogue dans les barrios comme point de départ des mouvements de milices populaires, les références constantes des Venezuelien-ne-s à la Commune mais aussi aux cumbes, le portrait rééclairé de Manuela Sáenz (maîtresse de Simón Bolívar et libératrice du Libertador), la mise en place d'un salaire domestique (article 88 de la réforme de la Constitution bolivarienne), l'évolution sémantique politique de "caribe" (issu du peuple Karaïbe), les citations du chanteur révolutionnaire Alí Primera, le choix du dépassement de la seule revendication ouvrière de nationalisation pour l'expropriation et l'autogestion contre un syndicalisme traditionnel corrompu et bourgeois. Le second interlude "tout 11 a son 13" décrypte quant à lui la violence de classe à l'oeuvre à travers les médias venezueliens lors de la tentative ratée de putsch en 1992. Les analyses de Gramsci sur l'hégémonie, du Fanon des Damnés de la terre, de Lénine sur la nature de l'Etat dans la révolution, de Régis Debray sur la lutte armée en Amérique latine sont constamment mises à contribution même si nuancées.
Cet essai d'histoire contemporaine se clôt sur deux problématiques passionnantes, le communalisme et l'armée populaire, caractéristiques de la volonté libertaire venezuelienne de ne pas réifier d'Etat bourgeois et répressif, en multipliant les zones de pouvoir direct populaire, à même de repenser voire légitimer le recours à la violence révolutionnaire d'autodéfense (ou non) pour se séparer progressivement du modèle de monopole de la violence par l'Etat permise par le verticalisme autoritaire propre à l'armée traditionnelle.
De même, le projet bolivarien met un point d'honneur à ne pas reproduire le centralisme bureaucratique en décalage complet avec les réalités paysannes ou celles des barrios de Caracas. L'ouvrage qui succède à We created Chávez de l'auteur, Building the commune : radical democracy in Venezuela, doit certainement permettre de développer encore plus cet aspect fondamental. En espérant que la Fabrique ou une autre maison d'éditions française puisse le traduire également... Pour oim en tout cas hihi.
Ciccariello-Maher se permet un mea culpa en postface de l'édition française, sur l'absence remarquable de Chávez dans son livre, ombre mais non-acteur du récit, alors que depuis sa disparition, la révolution bolivarienne est plus que jamais menacée... Le Venezuela est-il d'ores et déjà en mesure de se passer d'un-e leader charismatique pour défendre ses intérêts à l'échelle communale, régionale, nationale et internationale ? Les mal nommé-e-s chavistes (disons les comuneros) répondraient peut-être oui, ce leader existe déjà et il s'appelle el pueblo (à qui est dédié l'ouvrage).
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 10, 2019
Just finished this excellent book, and am in awe on multiple levels.
For one, I am impressed and inspired by the scholarship and intellectual nuance and also just plain good writing that went into the creation of this text.
For two, I am in awe of what the Bolivarian revolution is, and the vast tapestry of social movements populated by many intellectually and pragmatically gifted radicals who are such an inspiration.
For three, even abstracted from the specific subject matter of this book, the way that this presented a social history is something I had never seen before and I feel expanded for experiencing something like a new way way of seeing.
For four, just for feeling so clearly the continuity of popular revolution in a Marxist vein around the world and up to the present. ie, as Marxists and Socialists and social activists of all kinds, we are all of a global fraternity of sorts with Fidel Castro, and the Zapatistas and the Ocalan and Che and Allende and Sankara and the Nepalese Maoists and Steve Biko and so many others. And this is an invigorating feeling.
I’m eager now to continue reading on several fronts:
More about Venezuela and specifically about the Bolivarian revolution.
More by this author.
More ‘People’s histories’ written in the same ‘inverted’ way as this book.
And more about the revolutions and revolutionaries I still know so little about (Russia, France, etc.)
So, as I sometimes ask...what should I read next?
For one, I am impressed and inspired by the scholarship and intellectual nuance and also just plain good writing that went into the creation of this text.
For two, I am in awe of what the Bolivarian revolution is, and the vast tapestry of social movements populated by many intellectually and pragmatically gifted radicals who are such an inspiration.
For three, even abstracted from the specific subject matter of this book, the way that this presented a social history is something I had never seen before and I feel expanded for experiencing something like a new way way of seeing.
For four, just for feeling so clearly the continuity of popular revolution in a Marxist vein around the world and up to the present. ie, as Marxists and Socialists and social activists of all kinds, we are all of a global fraternity of sorts with Fidel Castro, and the Zapatistas and the Ocalan and Che and Allende and Sankara and the Nepalese Maoists and Steve Biko and so many others. And this is an invigorating feeling.
I’m eager now to continue reading on several fronts:
More about Venezuela and specifically about the Bolivarian revolution.
More by this author.
More ‘People’s histories’ written in the same ‘inverted’ way as this book.
And more about the revolutions and revolutionaries I still know so little about (Russia, France, etc.)
So, as I sometimes ask...what should I read next?
July 15, 2025
Geo Maher's 'We Created Chavez' is an incredible book and needed addition to the 'People's History' series. It reads like 'A People's History...' covering the broad history of Venezuela from below through its revolutionary and mass movements to its modern struggle against the encroachment of the Yankees and against itself. Maher traces this tension in Venezuelan history between revolution and reaction with Chavez acting as this possible eruption of a revolutionary moment. For the left, there is this dilemma of understanding that is perfectly encapsulated by the title, "We Created Chavez": do we as (critical) outsiders praise (or criticize) Chavez or simply recognize the role of the masses as the real agents and creators of this revolutionary moment? My anarchist tendency is to deny the significance of Chavez and solely emphasize the mass movements efforts, but I think Maher does a good job of showing how Chavez and the situation in Venezuela are different and require some nuance.
I highly recommend this book (and Maher's other book 'Building the Commune') as a good antidote to the common anti-socialist 'What about Venezuela?' found all over right-wing media and as a way to grapple with the question of power and the left.
I highly recommend this book (and Maher's other book 'Building the Commune') as a good antidote to the common anti-socialist 'What about Venezuela?' found all over right-wing media and as a way to grapple with the question of power and the left.
April 15, 2019
Necessary and great social movement history of Venezuela. Covers the colonial, dictatorship and then neoliberal climates which required the organized resistance of the people, which produced and laid the groundwork for the success of -- the main argument of the book -- Hugo Chavez's movement and later government. Assumes some knowledge of Venezuelan modern history, but is definitely accessible to those who have none.
Should be read especially today as the US is attempting a bald-faced coup to return Venezuela to colonial status, but many many lessons exist in this book even if that wasn't the case. Really aids in understanding the differences of the "pink tide" governments' ability and inclination to really integrate with the social movements and move toward something of a profoundly different and mass character vs. western elite 'democracies' of the liberal/neoliberal type.
Should be read especially today as the US is attempting a bald-faced coup to return Venezuela to colonial status, but many many lessons exist in this book even if that wasn't the case. Really aids in understanding the differences of the "pink tide" governments' ability and inclination to really integrate with the social movements and move toward something of a profoundly different and mass character vs. western elite 'democracies' of the liberal/neoliberal type.
July 26, 2021
Really great marxist analysis of the last 50-60 years of Venezeula history. Ciccariello-Maher takes organizing and movement building very seriously so it's a good book to read if you're into that. His theoretical insights are really helpful too and the use of Frantz Fanon's work throughout the book is always appreciated! Also really good writing/prose imo. Definitely would recommend for anyone wanting to learn about Venezuela / the Bolivarian revolution :)
July 7, 2022
while the book has intriguing ideas and provided a very detailed account of the revolutionary process, this is not the book to read if you’re unfamiliar with Venezuelan history as i found out the hard way. i think i would absolutely love this book if i came back to it at some point with a better understanding of the history it is talking about
September 19, 2018
Poorly written hackery. I cannot believe this guy walks around calling himself a political scientist.
October 24, 2025
A truly important read
October 14, 2020
Uma excelente análise historiográfica a respeito da Revolução Bolivariana. Cumpre muito bem o papel de explicar esse fenômeno sem reduzi-lo unicamente as ações de Chavez. Mais que os eventos que giram entorno do Comandante, o que se denomina por Revolução Bolivariana tem explicação e raízes que remontam diretamente as revoltas populares dos anos 1980, em especial o Caracazo, mas tbm as experiências (fracassadas em certa medida) da guerrilha, movimento sindical, movimento estudantil dos anos 1960 e 1970.
O autor se propõe a analisar justamente esses anos anteriores ao governo Chávez, contudo, em diversos momentos, especialmente na segunda parte do livro, ele fala de situações, atores e problemas tangentes ao governo chavista. Foge um pouco da proposta que o autor mesmo se coloca, apesar de ser muito interessante.
O único ponto que me deixou um pouco insatisfeito no livro eh que se discute muito os anos 60-70-80, construindo uma narrativa que culmina no Caracazo. Os anos 1990 contudo são muito pouco abordados, pulando, quase de imediato para alguns apontamentos sobre a constituinte e depois do golpe sofrido por Chavez em 2002.
O autor se propõe a analisar justamente esses anos anteriores ao governo Chávez, contudo, em diversos momentos, especialmente na segunda parte do livro, ele fala de situações, atores e problemas tangentes ao governo chavista. Foge um pouco da proposta que o autor mesmo se coloca, apesar de ser muito interessante.
O único ponto que me deixou um pouco insatisfeito no livro eh que se discute muito os anos 60-70-80, construindo uma narrativa que culmina no Caracazo. Os anos 1990 contudo são muito pouco abordados, pulando, quase de imediato para alguns apontamentos sobre a constituinte e depois do golpe sofrido por Chavez em 2002.
March 24, 2018
It's a great book, but I feel like a super-ignorant person from the US like myself, who was just trying to get an overview of the Bolivarian Revolution, is not the audience for the book? That is to say, at some points it seemed like it was engaging in a polemic with the Western media or anti-Chavez forces, giving an account from the people's eyes (similarly to how Zinn's "People's History of the US" is pushing back against hegemonic "mainstream" accounts of US history). So the only issue for me is that, unlike in the case of Zinn, I didn't know enough in general about Chavez or the history of Venezuela/the Bolivarian Revolution to be able to make heads or tails of a lot of the points. With that said, though, I'm going to go read some of the books cited herein (e.g., some of Richard Gott's work), and come back and read this again once I have a better grasp of the general "overview".
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews