Hugo Chavez and Thucydides’ Realism After a long battle with cancer, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez died on March 8th, 2013. The controversial leader was revered by both his constituents and worldwide followers. Political leaders, such as Rev. Jesse Jackson and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, attended the viewing (Castillo, CNN). So many high-ranking Venezuelan military officials attended Chavez’s funeral that the viewing was extended for another seven days. President Chavez was a polarizing figure in international politics. In the Western political world, Chavez was depicted as a dictator who repressed the bourgeoisie through sweeping socialist reform. However, the same reforms, which drastically broadened the availability of land, housing, and healthcare for millions, were met with open arms from the lower class (Godrej, New Internationalist). Most notably, he addressed Venezuelan economic inequality; the oligarchic regime that ruled before him neglected the poor. “Hugo fed the hungry. He lifted the poor,” Rev. Jackson said at the funeral. “He raised their hopes. He helped them realize their dreams." The CNN article, “Chavez's Impact on Venezuela Lauded at Funeral,” described the former Venezuelan head of state as an effective reformer of economic policy (Castillo, CNN). However, related articles provide varying opinions on the socialist leader. Despite being credited with putting the nation’s poor at the forefront of his policies, shortly after assuming power he manipulated the political system to such an extreme that democracy existed only in name rather than the actual practice of the Venezuelan government. The Chavez administration not only opposed domestic political adversaries, but international political leaders, such as the conservative US President George W. Bush, were openly chastised for their right-wing policies. Similar to his Iranian ally Ahmadinejad, Chavez labeled Bush as “The Devil” (Godrej, New Internationalist). The political theory held by Hugo Chavez can be compared to Thucydides’ version of political realism. Self-interest, through a distrust of foreign nations, national security, and struggle for power, the three pillars of Thucydides’ realism, were clearly practiced by Chavez (Korab-Korawitz, 2012). According to these pillars, Chavez indeed stressed the importance of promoting self-interests and preserving national power through his policies. However, using Aristotelian teachings about the dangers of an unbalanced constitution, the third pillar of Thucydides’ realism: struggle for power; Chavez’s policies can be argued to be unjust due to his inability to accommodate the interests of the upper class. In the modern political world, foreign relations are not only inevitable, but they are necessary for a state to be considered a legitimate player in the international political sphere. Unlike Thucydides, who viewed potential military aggressors as biggest threat to the state, Chavez considered capitalist and imperialist interference in the Latin American world as the largest attack on the state (Korab-Korawitz, 2012). He can be credited with spreading a new position of international politics throughout Latin America, known as Bolivarianism. Bolivarianism promotes national sovereignty, civilian-military unity, and Latin America integration (Sanoja, Bulletin of Latin American Research). Essentially, Chavez adopted the realist view of self-interest and national security on a continental scale, not only protecting the self-interests of Venezuela, but other like-minded nations in Latin America as well. During his fourteen-year presidency, Chavez nationalized many industries to remove foreign influence, and used the abundance of Venezuelan oil to flex his muscles against his international opponents (Gollinger, CNN). The United States, who currently does not have an ambassador in Venezuela, was quickly labeled as the most dangerous foreign influence to Chavez and his economic
