I'd argue more corrupt. With a continued management of oil revenues for and by elites, you'd essentially see a slowly evolving kleptocracy. At best, a corrupt autocracy along the lines of the Persian Gulf states. The repeated lesson of oil states around the world is that due to concentrations of wealth, and the ease of international transfer of funds, they're highly prone to corruption. First world states like England avoid this trap, third world states generally don't.
And I just can't see a more democratic Venezuela. It's pretty clear that Perez showed the direction that the elites were headed.
I think its a mistake to ignore the underlying social and demographic issues and simply assume that institutional politics would continue on its normal course. Rather, institutional politics are the cork that bobs along on the surface, it doesn't control or direct the currents beneath. In this case, the institutional politics had gotten pretty waterlogged. The elite consensus was just about out of ideas and initiatives.
I don't see the perpetuation of the elite consensus or institutional politics of the past era as producing anything more than a steadily deteriorating kleptocracy in the long run.
And I have some doubts, given underlying social trends, that this emerging kleptocracy would have managed to maintain itself.
Ultimately, I think Venezuela would eventually drift into the sort of 'people power' crises that overthrew the Bolivian government and upset Argentina.
You might end up with a genuine radical in power, as opposed to a modified keynesian.
And I just can't see a more democratic Venezuela. It's pretty clear that Perez showed the direction that the elites were headed.
I think its a mistake to ignore the underlying social and demographic issues and simply assume that institutional politics would continue on its normal course. Rather, institutional politics are the cork that bobs along on the surface, it doesn't control or direct the currents beneath. In this case, the institutional politics had gotten pretty waterlogged. The elite consensus was just about out of ideas and initiatives.
I don't see the perpetuation of the elite consensus or institutional politics of the past era as producing anything more than a steadily deteriorating kleptocracy in the long run.
And I have some doubts, given underlying social trends, that this emerging kleptocracy would have managed to maintain itself.
Ultimately, I think Venezuela would eventually drift into the sort of 'people power' crises that overthrew the Bolivian government and upset Argentina.
You might end up with a genuine radical in power, as opposed to a modified keynesian.