Chavez’s death leaves Venezuela in a critical state; the response in Washington was quick and almost too eager. According to CNN, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Robert Menendez views Chavez’s death as having  “left a political void that we hope will be filled peacefully and through a constitutional and democratic process, grounded in the Venezuelan constitution and adhering to the Inter-American Democratic Charter.” Basically, he is hoping for Venezuela to return to its ‘once robust’ system of democracy’ by calling for free and fair elections to occur in the aftermaths of the dictator’s death. This is a sentiment shared by many, including Venezuelan citizens and expats, not just U.S. politicians. However, there appears to be an equal number of mourners among the celebrators; despite any disagreements with his leadership style, Chavez was truly committed to improving the lives of his fellow countrymen, with a particular focus on the poor and the disenfranchised. In his time in office, it is estimated that he has cut the country’s poverty rates in half.

These mixed reactions to Chavez’s death, whereby some are critical of his presidency, saying it was “characterized by a dramatic concentration of power and open disregard for basic human rights guarantees” (Human Rights Watch), and others are mournful of a man who was a ‘champion of the poor’ bring to light questions about the inherent value we seem to attribute to democracy. This is obviously something that has been discussed, and rehashed repeatedly in class; I think there is a general consensus that authoritarian regimes demonstrate greater efficacy and effectiveness in enacting any substantial changes. This makes sense because power is concentrated in one, a select group of, person/s, as opposed to the diluted, separation of powers democratic approach. Evidently there is the incentive to abuse power when it is left unchecked, but, in the cases of those like Chavez, who, according to some at least, had truly noble intentions, perhaps there really is some merit to the idea of the ‘gentle, benevolent dictator.’ What do you think? Should the people be excitedly calling for ‘democracy, democracy, democracy’ to be reinstated in Venezuela?