Updated 3 months, 4 weeks ago

Venezuela’s future in a couple of pages

For more singularity in this case is the fact that not many Venezuelan collective books have aimed to focus the future or to focus on prospective visions rather, they have tended to offer a balance or seek explanations in a relatively more reliable neighborhood as the immediate past might be.

Then comes the case of the book called Venezuela, an illusion of harmony, an ambitious post-disciplinary study conducted in 1984 by the duo Moses Naim-Ramon Piñango, or another titled Lessons from the Venezuelan Experience, edited by the Woodrow Wilson Center In 1995. The novelty of the present is partly explained by the uncertain future, or by the fact that the future does not usually attract the attention of many disciplines or simply because the future always comes in Speculative and never conclusive exercise. Moreover, as the historian María Elena González has taken care to clarify for this volume, that future may be a matter of days, months, or a few or many years. In this sense, there are futures that arrive immediately, almost without realizing it; others, on the other hand, take the slowness with which it costs to decant the present. So the future never has a definite temporal dimension. But there is also what, in this same volume, says another author, the political scientist Humberto Njaim: we can see the future from different points of view.

What Njaim said is very pertinent to the fact that each of the twenty-two authors summoned brings with them the baggage and the optics that confers their respective field of knowledge in order to enter into this reckless exercise of futurology. And while it is true that each one tries to rub the glass ball in his own way, it is key to notice something that is related to most of the essays gathered in the book. Each one tries to deduce the future by alerting us about the dangers that persist long ago within what has been the construction of Venezuela as a Republic; But, at the time of not making concessions to the silly and useless saying that "all past times were better," it seems that these essays also claim to draw attention to what their strengths have been.

The book opens fires with a delivery focused on the challenge of what it means to look for prospects for a productive apparatus that is in an intensive care state. Its author is the economist Anabella Abadi who, following her travels through what has been almost 17 years of punitive measures, confiscatory practices, arbitrary restrictions, treacherous inspections or imposition of fines and sanctions on the business sector, leads to the conclusion that Called the Bolivarian process was able to gradually raise the temperature in the oven. Unlike other radicalisms that have promoted changes on the basis of the frenzy, the latter has done so rather by calculating his steps at every moment, knowing how far forward, and from which -momentually or tactically- to go back to, then, Keep moving forward. The best proof is the parable described between what the 1999 Constitution calls the harmonious development of a social market economy and the increasingly warmongering nomenclature adopted since then to manage and control everything that has to do with the production and distribution of goods And services. However, in the opinion of Abadi - as well as the one who speaks to them - there is still a lot of muscle (in terms of human resources, skilled labor and capacity for innovation) to stop this insane deindustrialization process.

Political scientist Oscar Vallés has the responsibility to close the volume. It does this by maintaining a difficult balance between expectations and false illusions. His main concern is the implementation of an extreme discourse on inequality which, at best, has served only to fuel and feed grudges. It is very difficult that, as a result of such a discourse, the psychological springs necessary for a society to find a stimulus to the development of the creativity, innovation and productivity it requires so much. Paradoxically, what concerns the Venezuelan future is to defeat a perverse sense of distributive justice, dominated by narrow and harmful visions of inequality. What is imperative in this case is, in his view, the goal of designing a strategy of governance that defeats the resentment that the ruling party has managed to translate into ample advantages - parasitic and clientelistic - for the benefit of its supporters.

Everything that has been said so far leads to assume, with no greater risk of error, that the astounding diversity of its content, as well as its most valuable recommendations, will make The Challenges of Venezuela of the 21st Century a book capable of enriching already the agendas of Research about that future that awaits, regardless of how short or long its arrival is in either case.