ABSTRACT
This chapter reviews the widely held view that Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez was an autocrat. The chapter argues that this “autocrat thesis” suffers from three major shortcomings: a fetishization of liberal democracy, selective de-contextualization, and disregard for disconfirming evidence. The chapter proffers an alternative “messy analysis of Chavismo” thesis, which analyzes Chávez’s significant achievements and limitations vis-à-vis multiple concepts of democracy. In so doing, this essay points to unresolved tensions in the relationship between liberal and other forms of democracy. While rejecting the view of Chávez as authoritarian, the chapter concludes that Chávez’s successor, Nicolás Maduro, developed into an authoritarian leader.
