Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Chavez Beyond the Black and White
http://freearabs.com/index.php/politics/69-stories/358-jb-span-chavez-jb-span-beyond-the-black-and-whiteA view from the Arab world on the legacy of Hugo Chavez
After a debilitating, public battle with cancer, Venezuela's iconic leader, Hugo Chavez, has died. Mourners in Venezuela crowded around his casket, escorting his remains to burial, as their tears freely flowed. The impact of his death was not confined to his fellow countrymen, however; since his death on Tuesday, people around the world have chimed in on the leader’s death and the legacy he left behind.
Perhaps this is because, while his populism resonated with Venezuela’s poor, his anti-imperialist rhetoric had a significant impact on those thousands of miles away. His fiery speeches spoke to the people suffering from unjust US policies, who found an ally in Chavez’s otherwise divisive sentiments. He was not a man to mix words when it came to speeches like this, which both garnered him supporters and stark opposition. As a result, his posthumous persona is usually either a whitewashed hero or the blackest of villains.
During his life, Chavez was a pillar of mutual exclusivity, of existing and functioning in a realm of contradictions. Vigilant pundits, activist leaders, and opinion writers forced the nuances of Chavez’ persona into the categories of “good” and “bad,” but he could never, in their eyes, be considered both simultaneously. His work to help the poor excluded his human rights violations; his criticism of democracy negated his reforms in education and healthcare.
As an Arab, the presence of this thought police is nothing surprising - similar patrolmen operate in the Middle East to constrain and dichotomize discourse on a multitude of other issues. For instance, those who offer even the slightest criticism on Hamas are cast as unequivocally anti-Palestinian. Expressing happiness over Gaddafi’s ousting means pigeonholing oneself as an American imperialist. Critics of the Muslim Brotherhood are rebranded as unsupportive of Egyptian democracy.
Perhaps this is because, while his populism resonated with Venezuela’s poor, his anti-imperialist rhetoric had a significant impact on those thousands of miles away. His fiery speeches spoke to the people suffering from unjust US policies, who found an ally in Chavez’s otherwise divisive sentiments. He was not a man to mix words when it came to speeches like this, which both garnered him supporters and stark opposition. As a result, his posthumous persona is usually either a whitewashed hero or the blackest of villains.
During his life, Chavez was a pillar of mutual exclusivity, of existing and functioning in a realm of contradictions. Vigilant pundits, activist leaders, and opinion writers forced the nuances of Chavez’ persona into the categories of “good” and “bad,” but he could never, in their eyes, be considered both simultaneously. His work to help the poor excluded his human rights violations; his criticism of democracy negated his reforms in education and healthcare.
As an Arab, the presence of this thought police is nothing surprising - similar patrolmen operate in the Middle East to constrain and dichotomize discourse on a multitude of other issues. For instance, those who offer even the slightest criticism on Hamas are cast as unequivocally anti-Palestinian. Expressing happiness over Gaddafi’s ousting means pigeonholing oneself as an American imperialist. Critics of the Muslim Brotherhood are rebranded as unsupportive of Egyptian democracy.
