1) Resignification of Bolivarianism:

A mestizo military man, with a red beret and great leadership zeal, dared to raise his voice to
to make visible and, subsequently, to reclaim the legacy of Simón Bolívar. That charismatic
character dressed in olive green, demonstrated that the image of the Liberator transcends flashy
statues, that man multiplied in the eyes of the humble of our continent, his
Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías

Chávez dared to study Bolivarian thought from its foundations: Independence,

social justice, equality, freedom, anti-colonialism, and integration of peoples. Understanding
the unequal conditions of Venezuela and nations with dictatorships imposed by States
United States (U.S.) led to thousands of humble people betting on a system change.
human and integrative.

Breaking myths and traditionalist schemes.

After his election as head of state in 1998, Hugo Chávez began to break all kinds of.
of colonialist schemes in Venezuela.

The shift from a representative democracy to a participatory and protagonistic one made visible those
residents in remote areas of the dazzling cities, whom Galeano labeled "The
without anyone.

The 'tree of three roots' referring to the legacy of Bolívar, Simón Rodríguez, and Ezequiel Zamora
it is essential to confront an indigenous model rooted in the social dynamism of
Venezuela that promotes true integration and guarantees of fundamental rights.

In response to the social needs of the country, Chávez initiated the creation of social missions that
they strengthened health, education, and the creation of housing for thousands of Venezuelans. The
social policies came to reclaim the basis of social justice and the construction of equality
of Bolivarianism.

Chávez and the integrationism of the peoples

The struggle for the Bolivarian current of Commander Chávez inspired peoples
Latin Americans to rise up against the oppression of the hegemonic boot of the U.S., great
continental projects are still relevant, despite the right-wing assault in
Latin America.
The creation of organizations such as the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), teleSUR,
Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) and the Bank of the South, are
internationalist projects leading to the self-determination of territories without
pressures from imperial countries.

We must continue giving birth to our new institutions, we must have a Court of
Human Rights, as well as an Electoral Court, a Defense Council, and the Bank of the South.
Commander Chávez expressed a broad vision of Bolivarian independence.

Historical support and realities

It is impossible to mention social missions and international projects without referring to the texts.
prophetic statements pronounced and written in the hand of the Liberator.

Among his memorable legacies, we highlight the Cartagena Manifesto in 1812, the letter from
Jamaica of 1815, Congress of Angostura in 1819 and the memorable speech before the Congress
Constituent Assembly of Bolivia of 1825.

After the physical disappearance of Chávez, both Venezuela and other Latin American peoples,
they have suffered an unprecedented war, media defamation, and judicial persecution
against progressive leaders has created a hostile scenario for Bolivarianism.

Nevertheless, the Bolivarian Venezuela and the Martian Cuba remain steadfast despite the
criminal attacks by the U.S. with sanctions that affect its dynamism
economic.

Currently, the tireless fighter for Bolivarian vindication has become a

world reference of resistance and struggle in the face of adversity.

Bolivarianism, led by Chávez and consolidated in the Patriotic Pole, came to power in the
presidential elections of 1998, galloping over the crisis of society. An economy
stagnant and disoriented, decomposition of the social fabric due to impoverishment, increasing
informalization of the economically active population, open unemployment rates in
increase, insecurity and corruption undermined the foundations of the democracy built by
political parties, institutions, and power factors since 1958. After the Caracazo of 1989,
with the brutal repression that the democratic State exercised against the popular masses with the
the backing of parties, businessmen, and civil society organizations solidified the rejection
from the population to the hegemonic actors. The collapse of AD and Copei in the 90s
opened a space of opportunities for emerging actors and sociopolitical proposals
different.

The first beneficiary of the institutional collapse was Caldera's government and its movement.
of National Convergence, who won the national elections of 1993 supported by a
anti-neoliberal and anti-party speech. However, they did not meet expectations.
popular. Caldera, beset by a major banking financial crisis, opted
in his first year of government for relying on AD and implemented a second package of
adjustments and restructuring of neoliberal orientation. This file did not stop the trends
to the social and institutional deterioration that continued throughout his term. In addition, Caldera
He continued and deepened the neoliberal oil policy known as Opening.
Oil company, weakening the State in its ability to formulate and manage that industry and
causing a significant reduction in oil tax revenue.

In 1998, an election year, there was an economic and fiscal debacle caused by the abrupt
decline in oil prices in the international market, where oil policy
The Venezuelan Opening had an impact, as it contributed to a loss of control of OPEC.
about the production volumes of its members. Oil income fell to its lowest
historical level, creating among Venezuelans a feeling of frustration and deepening
in them the rejection of traditional elites, parties, and moderate solutions. This gave
viability for a bold political solution in the presidential elections this December. Chávez
with a radical anti-neoliberal speech, threatening to fry the heads of the aging elites and
corrupted and to take the country out of the crisis, supported by the broad electoral platform constituted
for movements and groups of different kinds but all identified as opposed to
traditional bipartisanship, the Patriotic Pole, won with 56.2 percent of the votes. From
there began to materialize the diffuse electoral promises of a new model of
democracy that, away from neoliberal solutions, will pull the country out of the crisis.

The arrival of the Bolivarians to power occurred rapidly, which is why many
the proposals of your project were vague, with little clarity and consensus on how they
they would implement. Still, the movement was vigorous, open, and dynamic, picking up and
expressing demands that society had been debating since the 80s. In the Constitution of the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (CRBV), sanctioned in 1999 by popular referendum, is
they incorporated various aspirations for change that were being formulated and debated in
the previous lustrums in institutional spaces such as Copre, within organizations
from civil society, or were expressed in street fighting (López Maya and Lander, 2001).
Some proposals for direct participation had been tested by local governments and
leftist regionals.

The deepening of democracy to make it more central and consensual had significant importance.
participatory and leading. The CRBV maintained the autonomy of public powers and the
instruments of liberal political representation, but combining them with new ones
instruments for direct and semi-direct citizen participation both for decision-making
decisions regarding the consultation and management of public policies. They were incorporated into the text
constitutional four types of popular referendum (consultative, approving, abrogative and
revocation), legislative initiatives, assemblies and local public planning councils
among other modalities. Political parties lose their name and become called
organizations with political purposes, expressing the rejection that the new ones have towards them
actors. Seeking to ensure their weakening and prevent the corruption of the past, it was prohibited
its financing with public funds.

Specifically, government performance until 2001 yielded modest results. There were
important political achievements, with the change of the constitutional framework and the drafting of laws
that institutionalized the principle of participation and strengthened the political change that the
majorities of the country were demanding. This contributed to the sustained increase in the electoral turnout of the
Bolivarians, who went from controlling eight governorships in 1998 to seventeen in 2000.
(López Maya, 2005). Political changes occurred, however, within a climate of
intense polarization and political conflict, both due to the significant resistance to losing their
positions by economic, political, media, religious, or union sectors,
as well as by the ongoing confrontations of the government and the President with
unions, intellectuals, groups with little power in the past and even individuals and parties from the
governmental alliance (López Maya, 2002). These tensions created the conditions for the
April 2002 coup d'état and the violent episodes that characterized the period between
the end of 2001 and early 2003, when the opposition took an insurrectional path to
press for the ousting or resignation of Chávez.

There was a numerical growth of cooperatives as forms of social economy. By the end
since 2001 these emerging trends were halted by the growing political conflict, which
triggered a capital flight putting pressure on the exchange rate and affecting the entire process
productive. In the second half of 2001, various surveys showed a sustained
weakening of popular support for Chávez (El Universal, 19-1-2002). Although the
Pollsters were also influenced by the prevailing political polarization, the harshness
confrontation activated fears, rejections and a weakening of the political base of the government that
those data reflected.