2012/03/01 by Marco Aponte-Moreno, Lance Lattig · 1 citation
Social Sciences · #Cultural and political discourse analysis #Latin American Literature Studies #International Relations in Latin America #Slogan #Battle #Cult #Champion #Victory #Politics #Charisma #Socialism #Communism #Law #History #Political science #Media studies #Sociology #Ancient history
paper · doi:10.1177/0740277512443528
openalex publication_date 2012/03/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/11
Caracas—Last July, when Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez was being treated for an undisclosed type of cancer, he announced on his 57th birthday that he had changed the slogan defining his Bolivarian Revolution. Until then, soldiers were required to salute their superiors with “Motherland, socialism, or death.” Standing next to his daughters on the balcony of the Miraflores Palace, the president’s official workplace in Caracas, and wearing a yellow shirt instead of his trademark red, he proclaimed, “We have to live, and we have to come out victorious. That’s why I propose a new slogan. There’s no death here. There’s life.” Then thrusting his left fist into the air, he shouted, “Socialist motherland and victory, we will live, and we will come out victorious.” His followers responded to the new salute with a mass ovation.Chávez’s decision to change this slogan as a result of his cancer diagnosis reveals the depth of his regime’s personal nature. He is the champion of his own political movement, a superhero, capable of emerging victorious from any battle, even against cancer. He is the charismatic leader whose personality and words define the revolution itself—regarded by his followers as endowed with heroic, even supernatural, powers and qualities. The ubiquitous display of his image, on television and billboards across the country, fosters a cult of personality. Chávez is the revolution.In this respect, Chávez draws heavily from his friend and mentor Fidel Castro, whose image is often displayed in public places and official events in Cuba. In fact, Chávez’s original slogan “Motherland, socialism, or death” combines Fidel Castro’s 1960s motto “Motherland or death” with Che Guevara’s “Socialism or death.” Chávez has openly acknowledged Castro’s influence on him several times. The relationship between the two leaders dates back to 1994, when Chávez was a lieutenant colonel who had just been released from prison following a failed coup d’état in 1992 against Venezuelan President Carlos Andrés Pérez.On December 14 1994, five years before becoming president of Venezuela, Chávez was invited to Cuba and was greeted on the tarmac by Castro himself. In an emotional speech at the University of Havana, Chávez spoke about having been influenced by the writings from the Cuban revolution, several of which he had re-read while in prison: “Cuba is a bastion of Latin American dignity, so as such we have to look at it, as such we have to follow it, as such we have to feed it.” In the same speech, he also made a clear reference to his lifelong commitment to the revolutionary route: “This is the first time that I physically come here … because we have been here many times in our dreams, we soldiers of the Bolivarian army, who decided years ago to give our lives to a revolutionary and transformational project.”Castro’s influence on Chávez’s discourse is evident in their similar rhetorical strategies. Both use expressions which connote grandeur when talking about their revolutions; they use words and phrases that give their rhetoric a tone of familiarity; and both refer often to historical figures to legitimize their projects. Both leaders are masters of military metaphors. Chávez and Castro are messianic leaders with extraordinary rhetorical abilities, capable of speaking nonstop for hours on end without losing their enthusiasm. For decades, before becoming ill, Castro delivered marathon speeches, sometimes for up to seven hours. Early this year, in his annual speech before the National Assembly, Chávez delivered the longest address in that venue by any Venezuelan president—a mind-numbing nine hours and 27 minutes, interrupted only by a handful of comments and questions, largely from the few opposition deputies.Like Castro, who was once called “politics’ latest superstar” by former Le Monde Diplomatique editor Ignacio Ramonet, Chávez presents himself not only as a revolutionary, but also as an international celebrity. He has his own television and radio show, Hello President, which airs every Sunday, often lasting six hours or more, depending on his mood. He discusses current events, politics, and history; tells stories; interacts with a live audience; and takes phone calls. He speaks in colloquial language, sings popular tunes, and even dances. His star status also involves meeting with celebrities attracted by his leftist, anti-American stance. Chávez has hosted Hollywood actors like Sean Penn, Kevin Spacey, and Danny Glover and was interviewed by supermodel Naomi Campbell. Oscar-winning director Oliver Stone featured him in his 2009 film South of the Border, a documentary examining Chávez’s portrayal in the media. The Venezuelan president has walked the red carpet at the Venice Film Festival and is followed by over 2.5 million people on Twitter.All this is accompanied, however, by an all but total control over the media that he has used to cement his hold on power and smother any serious opposition during his 13-year reign. In 2007, RCTV, a network that ranked among the most critical of Chávez’s administration, was taken off the air as the government refused to renew the channel’s terrestrial license. In 2009, 34 radio stations critical of Chávez’s administration were silenced for “failing to hand in their registration papers on time.” According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Venezuela’s airwaves between 1999 and 2010 were interrupted by 1,300 hours of cadenas—presidential speeches and propaganda messages that by law all national radio and TV channels must broadcast. In 2010, six cable TV channels were taken off the air for refusing to transmit cadenas, which often last several hours and showcase Chávez proclaiming the achievements of his government. Last year, Globovision, the last Venezuelan television broadcaster openly critical of Chávez’s administration, was fined 2.2 million (7.5 percent of its gross income) for alleged violations of Venezuela’s new “media responsibility” laws, passed by presidential decree in 2010.As well as using the media as a vehicle for his formidable rhetorical skills, Chávez has followed in Castro’s footsteps by seeking direct control over the airwaves. In 2007, after shuttering RCTV, Chávez launched an 800 million partnership with Cuba to develop RCTV’s broadcast spectrum under state control and to develop more state media outlets supportive of Chávez’s revolution. Today, the government controls over 60 percent of the radio and TV spectrum in Venezuela, including several state stations and government-financed community stations. The propaganda apparatus Chávez has created, financed with the revenues from high oil prices, allows him to campaign constantly, placing any electoral opponents at a clear disadvantage. The total number of hours the president has spoken in the cadenas and in his weekly TV and radio show since his arrival to power in 1999 adds up to one whole year of nonstop broadcasting.Under Chávez’s reform of Venezuela’s media laws, dissident journalists face the threat of prison for vaguely worded offenses deemed contrary to “social responsibility.” In Cuba, prison sentences for similar offenses, such as insulting officials, have been handed down to journalists during Castro’s regime. Last year, Chávez’s government shuttered the magazine Sexto Poder after it published a montage showing influential women in Chávez’s government as cabaret dancers. The magazine was accused of “instigating hatred,” and its editor-in-chief was imprisoned. The magazine is now published from exile, where its current editor, investigative reporter Patricia Poleo, fled in the face of politically motivated charges of homicide after exposing the murder of a prosecutor.The case of Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, and his relationship with Ecuador’s media, is a prime example of Chávez’s regional influence. Correa, who a Washington Post editorial earlier this year called “an autocratic acolyte of Hugo Chávez,” has managed to increase his government’s control of the media from one radio station in 2007 when he took office, to four radio stations, five television channels, two newspapers, and four magazines today. Correa also attacked Ecuador’s leading daily newspaper, El Universo, which published an article critical of his handling of a police uprising, which left eight people dead. After Correa responded with a criminal defamation suit, opinion editor Emilio Palacio and three directors of the newspaper were sentenced to three years in prison. The newspaper was fined a crippling 40 million. Following international condemnation, however, Correa reversed the sentences with a presidential pardon in February.Intimidation of journalists is a trademark of dictatorships, including Castro’s Cuba. However, in the case of Chávez and Correa, these assaults on freedom of the press are perpetrated in nations that are perceived as “democracies” by their citizens. In contrast to the Cuban dictator, Chávez and Correa came to power through the ballot box rather than armed insurrection. But upon taking office, both Chávez and Correa launched a process of drafting new constitutions, adopting a polarizing rhetoric, re-defining national symbols to break with the past, and gradually passing laws that concentrate power in the presidency. Both leaders have responded to public dissent by tightening control of the media. Chávez’s Venezuela and Correa’s Ecuador represent a new form of Latin American dictatorship—a type of illiberal democracy (as in Putin’s Russia or Berlusconi’s Italy) where media control, coupled with divisive and authoritarian rhetoric, have become central elements enabling their authors to remain in power.Chávez burst on the national stage in February 1992, when he led the first of two failed coup d’états that year. After his surrender, he addressed his co-conspirators national television. “For now, the objectives that we have planned were not achieved,” he said. “That is to say, in Caracas, we were not able to take power.” Although the speech described a military defeat, it was a political victory for Chávez, gaining him widespread sympathy in a country hit by political and economic turmoil. After his release from prison in an amnesty two years later, Chávez chose the electoral route to power rather than the military one. In 1999, he was elected president with 56 percent of the vote.True to his military roots, however, Chávez tends to frame his political project as “war,” employing military metaphors when referring to aspects of his “revolution.” Social programs are referred to as “missions,” elections as “battles,” and electoral recruiters from his party, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (psuv) as “patrols.” To prepare for the 2010 legislative elections, the psuv’s 220 candidates, all dressed in red and raising their left fists, were sworn in by the president in a public act under the name of National Commando of Campaign Bolívar 200, referring to the bicentennial of the Venezuelan independence process which Simón Bolívar began in 1810.Other than the April 2002 failed coup d’état against Chávez, which touched off nationwide unrest lasting two days, leaving 19 dead and more than 200 wounded, his regime has existed in an environment of relative peace despite the deepening polarization between government supporters and opponents. Given the absence of violent change characteristic of revolutions in other countries, it can be argued that the use of military language in Chávez’s discourses responds to the need to build a genuine revolution, but with violence kept purely at the level of discourse. Rhetoric in Venezuela has become a safety valve for revolutionary sentiments. It is a lesson to be studied closely in cases throughout the Western hemisphere and beyond. After all, Chávez the proselytizer has followers far from his Bolivarian republic.Castro’s support has been essential in legitimizing Chávez’s project as the Cuban leader embodies the spirit of revolution in Latin America and many parts of the world. In 2010, Bolivian President Evo Morales said in a speech that when he asked Castro how to organize the revolution and the guerrillas, Castro replied that he had to follow Chávez’s example of “a democratic revolution, a revolution with the people.” Castro’s legitimization of Chávez’s revolution has not come without a cost. Venezuela ships some 115,000 barrels of oil at preferential rates to Cuba every day, representing 60 percent of Cuba’s oil needs. In return, Cuba provides strategic expertise in national security, intelligence, and the Cuba this to an that percent after Cuba economic support in office, the language of Venezuela’s president tends to be and speeches with and He of his even In this speech at the National Assembly, a and presidential out the of and government The president by that before elections for the have the to with he using a colloquial to discourse is not only but can be in the he how or even it democratic such as the of In 2009, on a Venezuelan accused of the since his for had after three years in Chávez on television and “That to be in prison for was and imprisoned. case the of the international media and In a to The last year, with the of the at Chávez to show for and The had an at a cancer in Chávez replied in this at the National Assembly, with an air of that it was not his powers to only as of state that the case be studied in the he than two years later, in have been other when the president’s words on national television have into In several of Venezuela the national oil their with the of a new closely to Chávez’s In a live television the president announced the of seven He also that on be without The with a in the oil in more than February 2010, in a live broadcast of his weekly TV and radio show, Chávez the of several Bolívar in the of Caracas, where several had for and the tone for a of including several of and However, several of these have not been by the have they been into of presidential show how Chávez authoritarian to by of Simón the revolutionary of Venezuela, has been used for political in the since his death in Bolívar the and is referred to as the for having led the independence in Venezuela and four other South American His has throughout the years into a national has Bolívar and its Bolivarian in The country has been the of and his political has been called the In all official the government is referred to as the of new was while the Venezuelan is now called the The president even to followers and In the president its own personal political with the of use of the Bolivarian cult and his own of Bolívar has far to the historical that Bolívar of Chávez instead that in 2010, as between and Venezuela one of the in after the government that Chávez was of the of Chávez with he that be to his Although the was Chávez his they he said. before the people and before I have I we will have it, but are the this Chávez was able to from the political his rhetoric had with his revolution as the of of Chávez his opponents as of the well with Chávez’s anti-American rhetoric, often representing his political opponents as of the United rhetoric has also been used for by Fidel Castro to legitimize his own revolution, but with the of the Cuban he as of our a of dressed in Venezuelan were at a in El a of the Venezuelan Chávez’s government accused the of being in an armed at his the opposition that they were in of who were up by of the Chávez regime. The opposition described the as a to public opinion and from a on Chávez’s for that year. The which with the to six years in prison of 27 of the the of Chávez’s anti-American have often been with the which from the anti-American rhetoric as Venezuela’s political and economic with Cuba Chávez’s discourse a of whose characteristic has been its anti-American The Bolivarian being as a against Venezuela’s political and began to be as a against the United and its Venezuelan In his speeches Chávez to the United Venezuela’s most as “a “an “a violent and “a the same Chávez his political opponents as to the and of the anti-American rhetoric has and in Castro’s anti-American rhetoric is often used by Chávez as a to from In December when the government was a with Russia for the of Chávez an international by that the United have the cancer of several Latin American including of of of diagnosis was and of After it was announced that President have cancer, Chávez the it that the a new to cancer that a that will be in I just it out to about it.” To support this Chávez in between and when by of with anti-American rhetoric has also been by a of against American political he took the a after at the Assembly, Chávez referred to as the came here and it of The which international Venezuela’s for a other he called “a “a and the “a In 2007, after said that Venezuela was a threat to regional security, he with as he a to the Chávez also that from himself as a Last President said in an with Venezuelan newspaper El that he was that the of the Chávez’s government the of the Venezuelan people and democratic after the was Chávez for the community in country the rhetoric has existed in Latin America since the and has been with the and American support of in the In the before Chávez’s arrival on the political like in and Fidel Castro in Cuba were among the most anti-American In have this rhetoric to electoral support in their is the case of Chávez and his Correa in Evo Morales in and in has also political Latin America who his anti-American In Chávez the first of state to President since the the last year, he against the Today, Chávez to cement Venezuela’s with anti-American In his to in President that of the people in this as well as their historical are similar to of the that from Latin America have had an of that they have they the of the referring to influence in the in Venezuela, anti-American in is used to and popular Last year, during the of the of the the government’s anti-American rhetoric of the release of a on presidential elections of the most of Chávez’s political Although he the most popular in Venezuela, his of losing the are The opposition has now and will in the a a elected with an high in the February by the of opposition Chávez’s party, the failed to a of the popular in the 2010 elections, the last nationwide in the years after Chávez took from among the rates are in than in and to figures from Venezuela has the of any most out of nations and on a level with and coupled with the president’s with cancer, a for a change in However, oil remain historical and the provides the president with of in The current in public of the coupled with his all but of how to use language to his will increase Chávez’s by one of Venezuela’s leading that at the end of percent of Chávez’s administration has been while percent the Bolivarian has the of the from speeches, and current in Venezuela, Chávez’s rhetoric be and authoritarian than in the of polarization of the country to out for a of at at a rhetorical In his address before the National in the president a more and at times. the end of his speech, the presidential the of without is of Chávez’s took the and a of called for to be for having the president with this even Chávez had for being an this with the president is a and is to than a on we have to for the of the people.” few later, in his article of Chávez,” Castro his rhetorical the Bolivarian leader was and to all the Cuban leader to the with Castro the of the launched against the president with words that to Chávez’s and following however, by victory in the opposition Chávez any and said to his how many times change as well as like a I are a and his to a electoral rhetoric, Chávez he will the of the even he He the National Assembly, to all opposition that any of the I to hand over power.” However, his authoritarian language, and of control, such a is to the current high of of Cuba’s on Venezuela that will its support and expertise so that Chávez in According to from the American in Venezuela by and published by the newspaper El Cuban have a in all of Chávez’s including control, and The also that Cuban is Venezuelan against American and that Cuban have to the of Chávez’s cancer, many have been for a from similar to the one in that in and the they have to to the words of their he often that he will be in power for the bicentennial of the of when Simón Bolívar Venezuela’s of Chávez’s most phrases when referring to the of a government in Venezuela is no they will come in the any or to Chávez’s rhetoric or the that from it must take on than has been out to Castro’s Cuba. Venezuela is a far more economic and political in Latin the is on of Venezuelan Until cancer, or more a him from the political Chávez will to use his rhetoric and oil to build anti-American as is the case with Correa in Morales in and in