Search for:

Posted on March 23rd, 2013, by

Considering the general perspective of the studied field, scientific and practical significance of this research is determined by the fact that it deepens the theoretical perceptions of the political mechanism of leadership in Latin America. The results obtained in the course of work on this topic serve for the expansion of theoretical models and prediction capabilities in the field of political leadership in the frameworks of political process, as well as the dynamics of personal political activity as a special phenomenon, which has endemic differences in each of the major geopolitical regions of the world. Thus, further in this paper, we’ll discuss the leadership styles and approaches to leadership by Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales, and Juan Perón, as well as draw parallels and cover the consequences of these approaches on the political situation in the region.

Rapidly burst into the political arena at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, charismatic H. Chavez made the whole world talk about him. In the first years of his presidency not many people regarded him as a man who came into politics to stay. But after a few years he will be compared with Comandante Che Guevara, called the new Fidel, and Latin Americans themselves will put him in a row with Simon Bolivar.

Political leadership of Chavez is a special type of leadership due to his personal qualities, peculiarities of national political culture of Venezuela and the dynamics of social processes in the context of the historical traditions of the region. Chavez as a political leader strives to develop Latin American type of charismatic leadership, using national and regional cultural values and myths. Chavez’s political behavior is based on national and cultural traditions of reproduction of political style of Venezuela military leaders and lies in combination of proneness to conflict and flexibility, to risk and prudence, in the unity of the strategic guidelines and political tactics.

A specificity of Chavez’s cognitive personality sphere is intuitive-heuristic model of interaction with the political reality. Chavez shows the motivation of political expansion that goes beyond the institutional and functional boundaries of the president of republic (Merolla and Zechmeister, 2011: 28-54). Thus, on May 23, 1999 a TV show Hello President was launched with the participation of the President himself. Chavez explained his desire to try himself as a television host, to bring the truth about the events in Venezuela and the world to every citizen. In the sow, Chavez asks questions to his ministers, talks to locals, holds space bridges with other regions, explains the government’s policy, gives historical lectures, sends kisses, and makes jokes. During the program, Chavez frequent criticizes various events or personalities, like the brutal games of individual representatives of the business elite, etc. On February 15, 2007, President Hugo Chavez began to communicate with his people every working day for a half hour from 20.00 to 21.30 (Merolla and Zechmeister, 2011: 28-54).

When delivering the speeches to an audience he feels its mood, and according to it, he easily changes the style of speech from slogans and calls to a focused and structured dialogue. Despite the fact that in his youth Chavez did not demonstrate any oratorical talent, with the beginning of his political career, the skill of beautiful and persuasive speech became his characteristic and essential feature.

Similar eccentric manner of public appeal is characteristic of Evo Morales. Morales was elected the president of Bolivia December 18, 2005. About 54% voters voted for him with 84% attendance. His success in the presidential election in December 2005 was largely determined by a pronounced anti-American campaign and promises to nationalize the gas industry. In addition, during the election campaign, he promised the voters, who are mainly farmers, to legalize coca growing. Their votes provided Morales a convincing victory in presidential elections (Kohl and Bresnahan, 2010: 5-20).

Posted in Term paper writing | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *