Hector A. Ruiz

MBA, Project Manager, Tennis Player, Musician, and Author of "How to Destroy a Country"

Tag: Venezuela

Venezuela, America.

In 1507, the German cartographist Martin Waldseemüller drew the first world map that featured the new lands discovered by Columbus, Ojeda, Vespucci and the subsequent expeditions that followed.

Waldseemüller named the new continent as “America”, after Amerigo Vespucci, using a latin variation of his name in female gender, reasoning that the existing continents Asia and Europa (Europe), had female genders.
The name “America” is written on the map over the land that today is known as “South America”, and the map is titled as: Universalis cosmographia secundum Ptholomaei traditionem et Americi Vespuci aliorumque lustrationes (Universal Cosmography according Ptholomei’s tradition and the discoveries of Amerigo Vespucci and others).

The first two cities founded in Venezuela were Nueva Cadiz (1500) and Santa Cruz (1502). Nueva Cadiz was a settlement founded in the island of Cubagua for the new population seeking pearl oyster beds. Santa Cruz was founded by Alonso de Ojeda in the Goajira peninsula, and it was the first city founded on main land.

Both cities were short lived. Due to internal disputes, indian attacks, and poor weather, Santa Cruz was abandoned just three months after it was founded. Nueva Cadiz saw a few years of prosperity, but after depletion of the pearl ouster beds and devastating seaquake in 1541, the city was finally abandoned.

In my following entry, I will give a quick glimpse of the first European organized government settlement in Venezuela, which contrary to what many believe, was not from Spain.

The origin of the name Venezuela

Today’s post will go over the subject of the origin of Venezuela’s name.

The most commonly accepted theory of how Venezuela got its name, is that Alonso de Ojeda named the land after Amerigo Vespucci’s comment during a voyage made along the new land’s coast. Historians are almost certain that Vespucci made four trips to the new continent. In one of the two trips of which there is almost complete certainty that happened (the second one led by Ojeda, the other one being the third), Vespucci commented to Ojeda that the stilt houses the indians built on top of pillars in Lake Maracaibo reminded him of Venice, which led Ojeda -Captain and Leader of the expedition- to name the country with an italianized variation “Venezziola”, roughly meaning “little Venice”. The houses Ojeda and Vespucci saw are known as “Palafitos”.

A second theory states that Ojeda named the country after encountering a small local indian tribe who named themselves “Veneciuela”. The third and least accepted theory is that the name came from a variation of the city “Valencia”.

During the years I lived in Venezuela, I would say that 99% of the population accepted the theory of the houses on the lake theory. There were dozens of references and stories about it in the Venezuelan culture, including many songs that were titled “Pequeña Venecia” (Little Venice).

In my next entry, I will discuss the arrival process of the European conquerors and how they set their new ventures in this new territory that would be now known as “Venezuela”.

“That’s just the way they are”

The other day at work I was having a conversation with a coworker about one of those sensible topics we are working on to become a better society.

A few months ago, I was working in a project with a fellow Project Manager from a foreign country. We had several meetings and conference calls, and I was amazed on how poorly he treated the people who were under his title, regardless if the person worked for his, mine or anyone else’s company.

I shared this with a friend over a few drinks one night, and my friend -who used to work for someone of the same nationality of the PM- said to me: -“Oh yes, that’s the way they are. They are very into hierarchy. They behave one way if you have a title that’s under theirs, and they behave in a completely different way if they are under you. It’s just the way they are. They respect hierarchy and that’s the way it works for them.” A similar example was brought to my attention when a friend who lived in a certain country where the people are very into punctuality, told me: “It’s part of their culture. It’s the way they are.”

All of this makes me wonder: in this new era of globalization and equality -something I’m all in favor of- where do we stand when it comes to qualities like this that appear to be intrinsic to a group of people who share a particular behavior in common?

Am I wrong in saying that people from country “X” are nut about punctuality? Am I offending anyone if I say it is common for a certain nationality to thrive for respect and hierarchy? I would like to say no, because otherwise, why would we have all the articles:

20 things to know before moving to Sweden

Things not to do in Denmark

7 useful culture shock preventing facts about austrian culture

That brings me to my next question: is it fair to associate a group people with a certain behavior in common, regardless if it is positive or negative?

The prologue of my book -written by my best friend Dr. Lorne Lopez-, states that my book is uses “the old-school free speech some of us today long for”. As an analysis of a society done by a foreigner, something that I wanted to clear up from the very beginning of my book, is the resource of generalization and how I wanted to avoid it as most as I could. In the end, I will generalize just like when my friend would say “oh yes, people from that country are very into hierarchy”, or like when my other friend would say: “people from that country are very into punctuality”. This is because when I see certain patterns recurrently occur in a group of people who have something in common, I cannot help but to state that maybe there is a chance that someone who belongs to that group, will also have the same characteristics.

In my book, I will state that Venezuela’s society was filled with flaws and cracks that contributed to initiate the debacle of the country that has led to its current collapsed state. The thing is that, society is not an omnipresent, omnipotent invisible entity being that surrounds us and which we can’t interact with.

Society is made by people, and in Venezuela’s case, people with a lot of similar characteristics in common.

Accepting reality

A common trend seen on non-fiction books is for authors to normally include one or two famous phrases at the start of their books. My reading of this is that firstly, the author intends to pay tribute and honor the person who pronounced the phrase, and secondly to use the phrase as a foundation for the manuscript that will follow.

When the time came for me to decide which phrase I would include in my book, I contemplated several options within the hundreds of works and famous moments that have ocurred throughout mankind’s history, and that could have a direct relation with the content of my book and the message I intend to send with it. Among the many options I had, there is one I would like to share with you, as everytime I think about it, it brings me a motivating and inspiring sensation that not many modern-day cliche phrases can bring, especially when considering setting a new goal or a new objective, regardless of its difficulty and challenge. It is an interesting contrast against the current trend of motivational hope and dream seeker phrases one can find anywhere nowadays, versus the simple fact of accepting the reality in which you are living. The considered goal set can be anything: graduating from high-school or college, reach a summit in hiking, getting that dream job you’ve always wanted, marrying the person you love, or becoming one of the best tennis players of all time.

In 2018, Toni Nadal -Rafael Nadal’s uncle and trainer- gave a TEDx talk, in which he shared an interesting anecdote that happened between him and Rafael during his early years as a professional tennis player. The story went that Toni and Rafael were preparing the strategy for the upcoming championship match of Montecarlo’s Master Series, which Nadal would be playing against some “random no-good swiss guy”, sarcastically referring to then #1 ranked tennis player in the world, Roger Federer. During the conversation, Rafa asked his uncle about what he thought of what his chances were of winning, to which Toni replied:

“Your chances aren’t good: Federer’s forehand is way better than yours, his backhand is better than yours, his volley is way too good and better than yours, and his serve, well, let’s just say…” and at that point Rafa interrupted him and said: “Whoa, whoa, nice kind of encouragement you are giving me to go outside and play against him…”

Without hesitation, Toni told his nephew: “Well, I can lie to you if you want, no problem. However, in a few minutes, Federer won’t lie to you at all. It’s better for you to face facts and know what you are up against with. That being said, let’s find solutions to the issue at hand”.

Toni resumed his presentation in the TEDx talk: “That has been the way I have understood how training works: accept your reality, which is something that seems to be a very complicated thing to do nowadays. It seems to me that we always have to give positive motivational messages to our people. It seems like we have to constantly tell them that they are the best and they are the greatest at what they do. I think that if you think of yourself as not good enough, and you know exactly the reality of where you stand, that becomees the first step, the starting point to reach our goals”.

It is in this matter where most people and especially venezuelans who dealt (or still deal) with the crisis of their country, have a very hard time accepting something as simple as the truth and the reality of facts.

I have always been someone who thinks like Toni Nadal does: accepting reality helps you know where you stand, where you are, determine what can you do with the resources that you have, determine where do you want to go, what errors and mistakes you made that you must fix, what could have been done in a different and more efficient way, how close you are from your goal, how is your overall plan working and how well are you following the correct strategy to achieve your goal.

In my book I will share and the main causes that produced the collapse of Venezuela, and of course I will analyze them extensively and in a very detailed way; one of them while not being specifically listed or identified, is undoubtly an integral part of the overall message my book brings to the reader, which is the meaninig of accepting your reality. Many of the issues, setbacks and problems that happened in Venezuela, happened because the people involved with them did not face their reality, did not accept it and even if they did, they were unable to find solutions to the issue at hand. Instead, they shielded themselves behind excuses they created, that prevented them from reaching a solution.

In the TEDx Talk, Toni Nadal didn’t mention the year where the anecdote between him and Rafa had ocurred, so I will make a daring attempt of speculating it may have been 2006, because that was the first time Federer and Nadal faced each other in a final championship match in Montecarlo. The result of the match was a convincing victory by Nadal, who defeated Federer in four sets 6-2/6-7(2)/6-3/7-6(5), despite having an inferior forehand, backhand, volley and a serve that was nowhere near his rival’s. What caused that result? Several reasons, I’m quite sure; but I’m also sure that one of the most important ones was the fact that Nadal was able to accept his reality and he was able to find solutions to the issue at hand based on the reality he was. Nadal didn’t find or made up excuses.

This brings me to the closure of this entry, which is what I believe will most likely be the hardest task for my readers, not so much for a non-venezuelan, but for the venezuelan average reader: accept reality. Accept that many things in their country were wrong, despite that when seen from the surface, everything seemed like it was going on great. Accept that when faced with issues, problems and challenges like the ones I discuss in my book, regardless of how good or bad the situation was, venezuelans failed to find a solution. More importantly: accept that everything I state in my book about the failure of their society, is true.

I have nothing against dreaming, believing in something and sharing hope when working to reach a goal and wishing to achieve it; I have nothing against positive motivational cliche phrases like the ones I see every day in social media, because I believe that when properly used and managed effecively, they can bring a fundamental value to the equation of reaching a goal. However, I also believe that every now and then, it’s good for all of us to have a dose of facing reality and put your feet on the ground, in order to come up with a strategy that will allow you to make those dreams come true.

I decided not to include Toni’s phrase in my book for a bunch of reasons, the main one being that I had other candidates such as John Stuart Mill, Rene Descartes and Friedrich Nietzsche infront of him, and I thought it was improper to put Toni Nadal with them. I also thought the phrase served better the environment of a conference as the one he gave, more than a book. However I kept its lesson and the debate that one can initiate based on it: Accepting reality and finding solutions.

Sometimes there are no problems or excuses in life. Only solutions, but only if you want them…

A prelude

As a first time author, for several weeks I thought about what to post on this site, and given that my first book will be released soon, I concluded that it would be a good idea to build up a thread of short posts that would help bring context of Venezuela’s history to a foreign reader unfamiliar with the country that is the main topic of case study of my book, the introductory manual of How to Destroy a Country.

Venezuela’s modern history begins in 1498 with Columbus’ third voyage. Six years before, the italian sailor had discovered America thinking it was the coastal indian islands of Asia, while seeking for more efficient trade routes to the east.

This event triggered the race to colonize the newfound lands, with Spain, Portugal, England, France and Netherlands being the primary colonizers seeking the vast resources of the new continent.

3, 2, 1… Launch!

Today July 21st I am officially launching my marketing for the upcoming release of my first book, the Instruction Manual to learn How to Destroy a Country.

In the upcoming weeks I will be post updates related to the book launch, its cover, pre-order status, advanced reviews, a few excerpts, and of course the official launch date, as well as continue to write as I have been doing about current news, sports, movies and other themes. I will also share a few of my personal ideas related to the book and a couple of personal experiences which I consider should be fair for the reader to get to know me and learn a bit about me.

Thanks for visiting my site and for subscribing!

HR

Venezuela should be a very rich country…

…but it isn’t.

Last month I wrote this article about what I considered the next steps for the now opposition led National Assembly in Venezuela should take in order to subvert the crisis the country is in. So far, none of my ideas have been implemented or even been considered.

Today I came across this very interesting article, that captures in one sentence, the constant affirmation what every Venezuelan knows and constantly preaches: Properly managed, Venezuela should be a very rich country. The thing is, it isn’t, which begs to ask the of question “why”, which brings a very simple answer: “Because it’s run the wrong way.”

Most of Venezuela’s middle class -who is composed by opposition followers- blame previously Chavez and now Nicolas Maduro’s government’s strict and somewhat questionable policies in all aspects of society, including economic, political and legal country affairs. While a case can be made to attest the opposition claims, a broader picture of how Venezuela’s society is functioning must also be considered.

I was having lunch with a friend yesterday in a restaurant located in an upscale mall in Caracas and after finishing our meals, we decided to go for a relaxing walk that eventually took us to the most visited place any Venezuelan goes to on their daily routine: a supermarket. Once inside, we noticed that a shipment of several packages of flour had just made its way into the store. Seeing the opportunity, we grabbed our corresponding allowed two packages of flour (1 kg each) which is the maximum a shopper can purchase during a week. In general, all Venezuelan supermarkets have regulatory controls implemented by the government that only allow shoppers to purchase a maximum number of goods during a seven day period. In the case of flour, one can buy two packages, each one costing two cents of a dollar. Yes, your read right: $0.02. Prices of other regulated products such as milk, sugar, vegetable oil, ketchup, pasta, are also around the single digit dollar cent value. The catch of course is, that unless you catch an extremely lucky break like my friend and I did where you happen to be in the store at the same time the goods arrived, you will be forced to endure hours of long waiting in endless lines as people flood the stores by the thousands to get their hands on their groceries at very cheap prices.

Luck is an extremely important factor when going grocery shopping in Venezuela, because unless you have an insider tip from someone working in the supply-chain distribution, there is no way for you to know when there will be stock of what you need. This is why supermarkets in Venezuela are normally deserted. On this particular day however, after grabbing our two packages of flour, we ended up spending over an hour at the store, because it took us fifty minutes to checkout and pay. Yes, you read it right: two minutes to shop and fifty minutes to checkout. In other words, one could say:

“Run the right way, a Supermarket checkout should take no longer than five minutes.” But in Venezuela, it doesn’t… because the supermarket is run the wrong way, and if you stand in a Venezuelan’s supermarket checkout line for fifty minutes, you will understand part of Venezuela’s ongoing crisis. In other words, you will be able to understand why Venezuela should be a very rich country, but it isn’t. Keep in mind this is just one supermarket. There must be hundreds of supermarkets in the city; thousands in the country… each one run the wrong way.

Moving towards deregulation of these products would be the right course of action to end this madness, which is a decision that must come from the government, but if they can’t (or won’t) drop fixed prices and distribution controls on regulated products, there are many possible options that can be implemented to improve the checkout nightmare:

1. Have one (or more) cashier for non-regulated products: if a costumer is buying an $8 pasta sauce and a set of knives, they shouldn’t go through the same fate than those just buying regulated products.

2. Have one (or more) cashier for senior citizens: it’s inhuman to have a senior citizen standing up for fifty minutes, when all he wants to do is buy food.

3. Have one (or more) cashier with fast dial-up/high speed connectivity with bank lines: paying with credit/debit cards is supposed to be quicker than paying with cash, not slower.

4. Have one (or more) cashier for express or fast checkout/less than five products.

5. Ban cashiers from using their cellphones while at work if they have customers waiting in line (or ban them altogether).

6. Have one (or more) pre-checkout cashier, so a customer can already have their order taken care of and then they would only have to pay when they arrive at the cashier.

I hardly believe any of the major supermarket chains will lose a substantial amount of money, if they would decide to incorporate one or all of these suggestions.

I will wrap up this entry for now, as I have more material to cover for another post and in my book as well, where you will learn how other vital and primary core components of Venezuelan’s economy, are also run… the wrong way.

HR

Understanding Venezuela’s 2016

Two years ago I started drafting a manuscript where I am providing a sociopolitical analysis of Venezuela’s recent history. My idea for it is to serve as a guide to learn how such a rich and promising country as Venezuela wasted every opportunity to become a global leading superpower, and instead fell on the path of turning into a collapsed failed state. It would be great if one day I can share my writings, however at the present time I do not know exactly what will come out of them. I would like to share some of what I have written so far, but I do not have a cohesive narrative yet, especially in the political aspect of the country, which has been in the eyes and ears of the world. In the meantime, I want my readers to catch a glimpse on the high expectations Venezuelans have set on this new year 2016, and the reasons why these expectations are so high.

After the recent trounce of the socialist government in Venezuela in the National Assembly elections, several of my friends living in the US and in Europe have asked me -since I am currently living in Venezuela- about the repercussions and implications the astounding results have for 2016, given the severe crisis the country has been for the past ten years. Some have referred to the elections results as a devastating night, while others call it “the first ray of light”, I call it “the greatest test in the country’s history.”

To understand politics in Venezuela, one must understand basic politics in other democracies and add a little tweaks here and there. School teaches us that in most democracies, governments have three branches of power: executive, legislative and judicial, with the logic that their powers can cancel out one another, kind of like rock-paper-scissors. Having that said, in order to understand the situation in Venezuela we have to build a bit of context.

Most historians agree that while General Marcos Perez Jimenez -who governed Venezuela from 1952 to 1958- was a dictator, he was on track to establish Venezuela as a developed world leading superpower, had he remained in office. Since his deposing, Venezuela entered a 40-year period in which the two most important parties (Accion Democratica / Democratic Action and Partido Socialcristiano COPEI / Social Christian Party COPEI) had close to an equal split on all three government branches of power, with other minor parties skimming a very minimal role. During this era, Venezuela began a gradual, slow but steady decline from Perez Jimenez’s progress path. As years went by, it appeared that the country was heading towards becoming an underdeveloped country, instead of the world super power Perez Jimenez had envisioned. Key signs such as an economy mauled by inflation and currency devaluation only kept getting worse as time went by. This economical downfall was backed up by countless cases of sociopolitical corruption and a failed judicial system.

By 1998 Venezuelans were fed up with the traditional political parties, and that’s when Chavez rose to power, winning an election by captivating the population with promises to slay the political system that had been deceiving the people for almost 40 years. Disappointed as they were, Venezuelans voted in consecutive three elections in 1998, 1999 and 2000 to legally handover complete power of all branches of the government to Chavez’s socialist political party. As he settled as leader of Venezuela’s new governmental model, Chavez created two more branches, which he called the electoral branch, and the moral branch, and accordingly filled them with socialist party members. From that point and on for over fifteen years, AD and COPEI were diminished to almost their complete irradication.

But then something unexpected happen: in 2013 Chavez fell ill and when his death became imminent, named Nicolas Maduro -one of his closest proteges- as his successor. After Chavez passed away Maduro assumed the presidency, and sent Venezuela through the worst crisis imaginable in the country in its history. Some of the most well-known aspects are:

  • Shortage of products, including basic products (food, health, hygiene), which has generated countless (and useless) regulation controls to access the few available products, at ridiculous prices.
  • Hyperinflation, at numbers so high (roughly around 700%), that Venezuela’s Central Bank stopped releasing any economic indicators or data.
  • Currency exchange control with four different prices to obtain US Dollars, with none of them being easily accessible by the population, opening the door for a black market where the US Dollar holds an ask price over 1,000% above the government’s official exchange rate.
  • Insecurity and crime rates soaring at numbers so high, that the Department of State and Justice -similar to the Central Bank- also no longer releases crime data indicators.

This whole mess reached a boiling point on December 6 last year, where parliament elections were held, and Venezuelans voted in 112 seats of 165 possible to a coalition formed by the all the opposition parties to the government. It was the first time in sixteen years in which Chavez’s socialist party lost control and power in a government branch, and the coalition of opposition parties against previously Chavez and now Maduro were able to obtain a significant and meaningful lead in Venezuela’s political scene, which is a feat that had seemed impossible for the past fifteen years.

This radical shift of power is basically the same story that had previously occurred and that allowed Chavez win 1998 and subsequent elections, the only difference being that back then there were no shortages and Venezuela was not living under hyperinflation economic indicators. There was a currency exchange control, but it wasn’t as bad as the current one; and crime had always been an issue in Caracas since the 1980s. My point is that the same impulsive feeling that made people vote for “something different” back then, is the same one that ocurred recently in December. You may note that I wrote “something different“; I didn’t write “something new.”

Some analysts call this impulse “punishing-vote” (as in, one candidate gets punished by the other option because there is no other choice). Finding where will this “punishing-vote” lead Venezuela next is Henry Ramos Allup’s main responsibility. Ramos -a leading opposition lawyer who now is the new president of the National Assembly- has been a long time AD deputy. He is well respected and well educated in Venezuela’s law and politics. Some people refer to him as a “good ol’ fox” due to his quick wit. Others consider him “old-school”, “more of the same” and other similar qualifications. 

The next months will be crucial, and the margin of error for the opposition is minimum, due to the desperate situation the population lives on a daily basis. Most of the country’s key productive population (recent graduates, young executives) have only one thing in their minds: migration. This means that the more capable force of the population is deserting the country and leaving the inexperienced and unqualified people in charge of running the day-to-day of Venezuela. Therefore, the opposition collition has yet to lay down a plan of what urgent measures will be needed to reactivate the country’s economy, and improve the quality of life of Venezuelans. Additionally, there are censorship issues, political prisoners, and so on. I myself am completely convinced the country right now needs three things:


1) Dismantle the currency exchange control system.
History has been proven, not once, not twice, but three times in Venezuela (as well as in other countries), that currency exchange controls simply do not work. It doesn’t matter if it’s a band system (Great British Pound 1992), or a fixed system (Zimbabwe). Supresing and afixiating the flow of supply and demand for foreign currency, does nothing good to the economy of the country. Venezuela’s currency exchange system must be dismantled. The sooner the better.


2) Reactivate local production and distribution of goods.
When you have a country that produces trillions of dollars in industries as broad as electronics, technology and shipyards, supporting an economy so diverse you don’t know where to build your next artificial island, then you can consider importing as a necessity or even a luxury. Otherwise, you economies should incentive local production of goods. Currently there is simply not enough for the country’s population. Imports -which currently are the only option- should be the alternative and never the primary source of goods, especially if there is a currency exchange system that blocks imports. Goods must be brought to the people locally, by whichever means necessary.

3) Develop a true anti-crime force.
Few things in life are as demoralizing as knowing that you have to leave from wherever place you are, because you are afraid you might be assaulted, attacked, robbed or raped. Despite having local, municipal, state and national police forces, none of them have been proven to be effective against the absolute stronghold that organized and unorganized crime has in the city. Venezuelans must have the right to feel safe in their own land.

The population’s frustration with Maduro’s government may lead to other potential objectives the newly opposition-led Assembly can set their minds into, such as impeaching Maduro or even having him removed from office. However, I believe, there is no better marketing to remove someone from office, than having your own results speak for yourself to prove how qualified you are to do a better job than someone else who currently isn’t. Anything unnecessary, unneeded, or uncalled objective, is and will be a deviation of what the real task on hand is and must be. Moreover, it will be judged as a waste of time and a waste of trust the Venezuelans placed in the new Assembly.

And that is why the opposition must make the best out of this opportunity that has been handed to them.

HR

Page 4 of 4

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén