When Luis Florido decried the possible denial of a recall referendum in 2016 as a “betrayal of Chávez’s legacy”, plenty of opposition supporters were understandably upset. Why would an opposition politician paint himself as a palladin Chávez’ legacy?

One of the issues raised was that this kind of statement embellishes a disastrous legacy, and helps create or perpetuate the myth of Chávez, to make it part of our social imaginary.

But in terms of myth building and the social imaginary, Florido’s words will have little to no effect.

First, because the myth of Chavez is already so deeply rooted.

The foundation of a myth is a belief, based on an image meaning is projected onto. Many of Chávez’s supporters never questioned his policies, his vision for our country, or his understanding of democracy. The Chavez myth is not that of a politician, but of a person. Even if his policies were a disaster, they still believe he had good intentions. The result cannot be not his fault.

Second, because the words of other politicians have no bearing on this myth: they can no more perpetuate it than a leaf blown by a hurricane can help perpetuate it.

The myth is already deeply seeded among the faithful, by Chávez himself. According to him, his actions and deeds were not related to his duties as president. What he did, he did for love. He told us himself.

The misiones, the housing, the hospitals, the reading lessons, the free washing machines: “Everything, we did for love”, he said straight to the camera, asking for votes in 2006.


Though ephemeral, political speech still can serve to persuade.

Compared to myth, political speech is ephemeral. A myth is much deeper than words. Myths, including that of Chávez, are not easily formed, and likewise, are not easily manipulated. Many factors lie behind their creation and their enthronement in the popular imagination.

What politicians can do is manipulate the emotions of the Chávez faithful. Though ephemeral, political speech still can serve to persuade. It’s mere manipulation through speech, and in that sense, Florido’s messaging is good. He was talking not to the traditional opposition, but to those in the middle and on the other side.

Remember the video of Henrique Capriles with a woman with the face of Chavez tattooed on her arm shortly before the 6D elections? She was still a Chavez supporter. And yet she loathed the current government. Capriles never challenged her memory of Chávez, instead he focused on her rejection of the government.

When the video came out, I can’t remember anyone complaining that Capriles was helping perpetuate the myth of the Good Chávez. What he was doing was no different from what Florido set out to do: pulling the emotional strings of those Chávez supporters who feel that Maduro & Co. have betrayed him…and them.

The 6D election was won precisely because the opposition has managed to bring into the fold millions of people that once voted for Chávez, including many that still have fond memories of him. If the opposition is going to succeed in forcing some kind of transition, whether it’s in the street or in the ballot box (or in both), it’ll need the support of many of those who still like Chávez.


Chávez filled many vacuums, and especially the vacuum of affection.

Dismantling the Chávez myth is a goal fondly to be wished for, but it will take a lot more than reasoned explanations. Chavistas are not blind to the evidence: they can see the disaster around them. Chavismo’s failure is corporeal: they can feel it in their tummies. But their view of him is not entirely based on reason, it’s mostly based on faith and emotions. Chávez filled many vacuums, and especially the vacuum of affection. In their mind, he was theirs and they were his. Yo soy Chávez, remember? That’s not unlike Saint Augustine’s definition of love: the wish to identify oneself with the object of love.

That’s faith, not reason. And in a mano-a-mano, faith beats reason every time. When they do interact, it’s essentially always in the form of reason reinforcing faith.

If you want to transform a belief, you have no choice but to start from what’s already there. The Chávez myth is part of our social imaginary. Red, Chávez. When we talk about Bolívar, unfortunately Chávez pops into our heads, however briefly.

Capriles and Florido are on the right track: transformation can only start from people’s current beliefs. Words can persuade, said Aristotle, when there’s an emotional connection with the audience. Rhetoric is most effective when it’s based on sentiment and emotions. And the contents of these emotions were established by Chávez long ago, both through rhetoric and affection.

Hopefully, the opposition will have the chance in the near future to work on correcting the excesses of the Chávez’ years, and be the victors who get to write history. But first, they have to focus on convincing people to oust Chavez’ heir: only then can they work on the myth of Chávez.

37 COMMENTS

  1. Cuando una creencia se mistifica y mitologiza no es por que refleje una verdad genuina sino por que satisface o expresa una profunda necesidad animica de parte de quienes la profesan.

    La figura de Chavez se mitologizo y convirtio en culto entre los marginales de nuestra sociedad por que representaba ese hombre paternal , amoroso , prepotente , campechano y fuerte con el que deseaban identificarse. y es que para ellos identificarse con el, con sus delirios , con sus fatuidades , con sus engolados enardecimientos les permitian sentirse investidos de una inflada y espureamente epica dignidad e importancia que su vida ordinaria no les posibilitaba conocer.

    Al amarlo (o amar esa figura el supo proyectar histrionicamente) se amaban a si mismos y nada mas precioso para un pueblo que encontrar alguien que les permita amarse a si mismos cuando su vida esta llena de penurias, humillaciones y fracasos . Por eso el mito perdura, por que abandonarlo es reconocer el propio fracaso vital y eso es demasiado doloroso …!!

    El verdadero legado de Chavez es la devocion a esa fabulada figura epica que el represento y que nadie puede reemplazar en el corazon de sus devotos …y son las promesas de esa figura mitologizada la que han sido traicionadas por quienes asumieron despues (fallidamente) el manto de sus sucesion ‘espiritual’ !!

    • Este comentario es una pequeña obra literaria.
      Queda como conclusión, que hay poco peligro en que el mito de Chávez se mantenga y pueda ser utilizado por alguien para ganar elecciones. Nadie puede arroparse con su mito, él mismo se encargó de que eso fuera así al dejar a sus incompetentes sucesores con tamaño desastre montado. El brand del chavismo esta envenenado y solo quedará su imagen como un recuerdo polarizante mas.

    • I’d just add, the cult of a strong man figure who has a unique gift to solve everyone’s problems and take the country back to a mythical time when it was great – say the age of Bolivar- is an attraction not limited to marginal sectors of the population. For the unbelievers (i.e. most people who read this blog), we were often left shaking our heads wondering how educated middle class people could hold these views, but they did, and they were strong, even in the face of objective facts. And we can say many things about the world leaders and other luminaries who pandered to the Chavez cult, but a lot of it was genuine admiration, and many of these people were not idiots and had access to the kind of information that could easily inform a contrary view.
      Also, Chavez was an excellent user and manipulator of the media, and those talents, as it turns out, were well suited to the explosion of social media that happened on his watch.

      It shows that there is something deep within all of us that longs for this kind of simple world view, even if it is contrary to all the facts.

      The cult of Chavez will never go away. The Chavez era coincided with a huge oil boom that benefited peoples’ lives, despite the gross mismanagement and corruption. Chavez died before he had to pay the bill. People will always say, he was a good guy, and everyone else around him failed him. And somewhere in Venezuela’s future there will be a Putin-figure who will tell people that the worst thing that ever happened to Venezuela was the defeat of the Bolivarian Revolution.

      The best antidotes to the Chavez myth are transparency, competence, representativeness, and accountability.

  2. Por “respetar el legado de shiabbe” es que la MUD, y la oposición en general, han sido la oposición más incompetente de la historia, al permitirle al chavismo usar el comodín de que si algo es “de Chávez” entonces no se puede debatir ni contradecir porque le “lastima los sentimientos a los devotos”, lo cual nos lleva como un círculo vicioso a que sea imposible volver a la gente en contra del chavismo para salir de este chiquero.

    Cualquier mito, CUALQUIERA, puede ser destruido y erradicado, es más, acá mismo en Venezuela está el mito de los mismos adecos, que en los 70s eran el chavismo menos las locuras comunistas y hambreadoras y que ahora son la vaina más odiada del país desde hace 18 años.

    No socavar y destruir el mito de Chávez para que hasta la gente más pelabolas e ignorante sepa la verdad de lo que él significó para Venezuela y para ellos mismos en última instancia, no es sólo algo irresponsable, es algo criminal, quedando como consecuencia cosas como esa mamarrachada ridícula de la “corte malandra” donde la gente adora a criminales, o peor aún, que cuando finalmente se logre derrocar esta dictadura, no pase el tiempo suficiente para poder acomodar mínimamente el país y llegue algún malnacido que abrogándose el fulano legado nos vuelva a zampar 20 años más de dictadura comunista porque el país haya quedado lleno de gente pendeja que crea que Chávez “fué bueno porque tomó en cuenta a los pobres”

    PD: Por cierto, Marc, el apodo “Chapriles” no fué de gratis que se lo pusieron al pelmazo ese.

    • Hehe, perfect comment. You are totally right. You can’t keep Chavez legacy and remove his heirs at the same time. That’s logically absurd. Actually, Capriles losing every damn election since ever is the empirical evidence of that. If the people like Chávez, they will vote for his heir. The good results on 6D were only possible because the Chávez myth started to collapse, the opposition wanting or not.

      • “The good results on 6D were only possible because the Chávez myth started to collapse”

        This isn’t really proven to be true… Look at the latest Venebarometro poll; the opposition now receives a larger share support from class D voters than the PSUV. Back in Chavez’s days very few of these voters would have voted Oppo. Not all of them would change their mind about the comandante that quickly…

        “Cualquier mito, CUALQUIERA, puede ser destruido y erradicado”

        No de un dia para otro. Eso implica un discurso negativo a largo plazo. Como se ha explicado en este blog, el Caracazo no sucedio meramente por el odio a los adecopeyanos. Ademas, en esa epoca la gente odiaba a CAP por traicionar su propia plataforma (algo que Chavez nunca hizo), pero el odio por los puntofijistas tomo annos en cultivar, lo que fue hecho por el mismo Chavez.

        La vaina es que a la gente no se les convence en un dos por tres; tienen convicciones, nadie quiere admitir que estuvieron equivocados. Desmontar el mito de Chavez va a tomar annos, sino decadas, y la oposicion tiene otras prioridades al corto plazo porque, al fin y al cabo, la gente no quiere escuchar esta diatriba politica, lo que tienen es hambre. Hay que tener prioridades sennores.

        • >> “…el Caracazo no sucedio meramente por el odio a los adecopeyanos. Ademas, en esa epoca la gente odiaba a CAP por traicionar su propia plataforma”

          El peo del 27 de febrero del 89 (El nombrecito ese ridículo lo exalta como una vaina buena) no fué un “movimiento espontáneo de las masas irredentas”, sin alguien o algunos que empujen y lleven a la masa del punto A al B, la masa se puede joder por décadas sin hacer un carajo, y el ejemplo es la Venezuela actual, donde la gente se está comiendo a mordiscos entre ellas pero son incapaces de arrecharse con el culpable que es el régimen chavista; este sitio lo que hizo con los artículos pertinentes a ese peo fué más que todo echar el cuento anecdótico de unos cuantos carajos que estuvieron en mitad del peo, sin dedicarle casi nada a tratar de analizar las causas que lo provocaron, y un montón de gente pegada con la teoría casi fetichista de “las masas arrechas salieron porque se adueñaron se su propio destino”, así que honestamente, los artículos respecto a ese peo no aportaron mucho que se diga a la discusión, fueron en resumen, palabras más y palabras menos, “llegaron unos militares y echaron tiros como locos a la gente que estaba en las calles y hubo un reguero de muertos”, más nada.

          A CAP lo desfenestraron al final porque el carajo al intentar reformar la economía del país le estaba pisando los intereses a un coñazo de corruptos y enchufados que ahora son chavistas furibundos, no porque “traicionara al pueblo que lo votó”, esa es otra ridiculez inventada por el chavismo.

          >> “…al fin y al cabo, la gente no quiere escuchar esta DIATRIBA POLÍTICA, lo que tienen es hambre. Hay que tener prioridades sennores.”

          El viejo “Sí, ajá, resuélveme el peo pero no me digas por qué hubo el peo en primer lugar porque me molesta tener que entender y pensar un poco.” y el “No quieras decirme que este peo es relacionado con uan política porque no soy un becerro estúpido que se deja manipular si no un libertario vernáculo y arrecho de pelo en pecho dueño de su propio destino”

          El querer despachar algo poniéndole la etiqueta de “político” es a lo que me refiero, querer ignorar a drede el problema por una solución inmediata e ineficiente es una razón de por qué el chavismo se ha mantenido por tanto tiempo a pesar de tanta incompetencia criminal.

          Precisamente es lo contrario lo que hay que hacer, hay que cada 5 minutos recordarle a la gente, sobre todo a los más comecables y que eran la base más fiel del podrido que están comiéndose una guaya porque fué ese carajo el que mandó a acabar con la producción del país por razones políticas.

          ¿Que va a tardar acabar con el mito? Sí, posiblemente, pero eso es paja que disque va a tomar 50 años, en menos de 8 años se logra eso, precisamente como el chavismo destruyó a los adecos desde el 98, con bombardeo mediático y reforma del sistema educativo para enseñarle a los carajitos la historia de Venezuela desde los años 60s, con especial énfasis en las guerrillas invasoras de los Castros y en toda la mierda que hicieron las dictaduras, precisamente para que NO SE REPITAN porque a la gente hay que condicionarla para que ABORREZCA las dictaduras con todo su ser.

          La prioridad ES acabar con el chavismo como movimiento político, para que la gente apoye a la MUD o a cualquier opositor, es obligatorio que deje de ser chavista primero, y como la oposición ahora no tiene un carajo de poder económico para comprarle la lealtad a los lambucios como hizo el chavismo, pues le toca sembrarle y hacerle crecer al chavista la arrechera irreconciliable con sus ídolos, simplemente DICIÉNDOLE LA VERDAD, que es por culpa de Chávez que todo esto está así.

          Así como le dije a más de un chavista que el que los carajos de los claps le digan a los pobres que la comida es una vaina política y que los amenacen con quitársela es una tremenda ESTUPIDEZ que sólo resultará en que esa misma gente les coja una arrechera demencial, le diría a cada carajo de la MUD, incluyendo a Lilian Tintori que “defender el legado” es una estupidez, por las razones que ya expliqué.

          • Hey Caracas Chronicles en vez de andar publicando por 10ma vez algún artículo sobre como “hoy, Venezuela cambió” y cualquier estúpidez políticamente correcta, deberían darle su propia columna a Umalog. Les aumentaría el tráfico durante todo el año y no solo cuando hay elecciones.

  3. Became a myth because he died just as the money ran out. So he is associated with “prosperity”. Just like Marilyn Monroe, she died beautiful, never got old. If chavez were still alive, there would be no myth. CAP became associated with money on the streets, he was voted in 1988 because of the myth, then reality set in.

    • The bad massively and catastrophically outweights the “good”, leave it to Chavez nostalgics to cling to that piece of shit he supposedly did good, not the opposition for fucks sake.

      Nunca ví a los adecos con esa pendejada de reivindicar las cosas buenas del perejimenismo, o peor aún, del gomecismo durante el trienio, por favor coño!

      • That is the problem. The “accomplishments” of Chavismo are basically smoke and mirrors. A lot of money got thrown around, with about as much effectiveness as if the petro-dollars had been cast into a hurricane.

        • Tejano,
          What some people will tell me is: “he gave the poor hope” and I would explain how that was not new, how they had the same hope in the sixties and in the seventies with CAP and how back then they were disappointed but the misery was not nearly as bad as now.
          And they will lose their attention in a couple of seconds because these people do not want to hear figures, facts.

          • As both of us have often stated, the average Venezuelan judges the effectiveness of the government by the amount of petrodollars it has to distribute. It is no accident that Chavez got elected in 1998, when the export price of oil was around $10/BBL, which in real terms was the lowest in nearly 25 years. It is no accident that many Chavistas view Hugo with fondness and detest Maduro, when you realize that Hugo died when the price of oil was around $100/BBL and Maduro is dealing with ~$50/BBL oil.

            And bad as the situation may have been in 1998 for Venezuela, it is much worse today.

  4. El Pajarito Comandante Eterno became a myth for simple reasons: He had charisma, was reasonably smart, he had tons of expensive oil to buy entire countries, and sadly, massive ignorance.

    Chavista opposition politicians do what the majority of politicians do all over the world: Guabinear.Switch sides, disguise themselves according current trends. They crave money and power, so the Aporrea types figured: join the winning trend: people love Chavez and hate Maduro, then so do we” So it’s mainly about greed.

    And/or incredible ignorance. Chavez had total control for 14 years. With tons of expensive oil.Venezuela’s disaster is moslty his fault. He created the wrong policies, destroyed private property and enterprise, and built nothing, while stealing all the money. So either these Chavista politicians are lying, or they are utterly ignorant, or both.

    The ignorance of the Chavista common pueblo is also staggering. For the reasons stated above. An abysmal lack of education. The Chavez “myth” was created by a ‘socialista’ fake rhetoric, after 4 decades of ad/copey, when the ‘pueblo’ felt ignored and alienated. Chavez exploited that very well, with lies and prmises and a fake ‘ideology’. And freebies for everyone, enchufes, izquierdas. All the Millions of Chavistas simply have no clue about the facts and History. And now they blame Maduro, while Chavez was the beast that created their mess.

  5. The mythology of Chavez needs to be utterly destroyed. If it isn’t, Venezuela will be repeating history in 25 years, just like Argentina did with Peronismo being reborn as Kirtchnerismo.

    • The myth will live on in the hearts of a significant portion of the population. The worst thing that could have happened is for him to die right before the deluge of suffering and misery brought on by his disastrous policies.

      • But they will die like old Nazis died. Most young Germans, at least those born in the West despise Nazism as much or more than a Briton or a US American.
        Society decided to attack the myth of a scoundrel by education.

        I know a woman who is very disappointed with the regime now and I know for her Chavez is still a God. She is without hope. But if she has children, I hope the rest of Venezuelans teach them what a piece of shit Chavez was.

        • There is an expression I forget exactly how it goes, about being a “believer without the doctrine”. Venezuela is full of believers without the doctrine (which is generally a good thing, I think). It seems to me that if things can be shown to improve under an opposition government, that will be the fate of chavismo.

          Sort of like how Che is everywhere seen today, and his ideas nowhere understood…there seems to be a pantheon of those characters into which Chavez might also neatly fit if things on the ground improve.

  6. Saint Anselm’s motto was “Faith Seeking Understanding”. Moreover reason must be applied to any article of faith and to be correct it must not contradict reason. Instead it should enhance reason. For example, given my life experience if is reasonable to assume that my mother will always love me. I cannot prove that she will always do, but it is reasonable to believe she will. This statement is reasonable faith.

    Divinization of political figures, be it Bolivar, Mao, Lenin, Kim Il Sun or Chavez “… is the opium of the people” and as such it should be deconstructed.

    BTW, great article!

  7. Yesmaira Benitez looks very young, in the photograph. If she is , say, about 25 , she came of reason during Chavez’s tenure in power. She represents an important portion of our Venezuelan society but not the only one. For many of these youngsters, even the ones who oppose him, Chavez is, apparently, already a myth, a legend,and no time should be wasted in trying to rob him of these qualities. The argument seems to be: Can we convince Venezuelans that Maria Lionza is not all powerful?

    I disagree. I believe this is the time to tell it like it is about Chavez. He was a scoundrel and his crimes can be well documented. This is a task in which we all can help.
    It is true that many Venezuelans will keep fond memories of him because of his handouts but, by and large, he is already starting to be seen as the main culprit of the Venezuelan tragedy.

    This article goes against this trend.
    Sometimes we think we are only being provocative when, in fact, we are helping to extend the life of undesirable myths.
    Venezuela should progress beyond the Maria Lionza type of myths if we want to join the civilized group of nations.

  8. There are various ways of destroying a myth
    ,
    1.- Replace it with a different stronger myth that makes the former one disappear into oblivion . (e.g. the Christian creed displaces the Pagan Mythology)

    2.- Appropriate the externals of the myth and transform it from the inside so that its stands for something else .(Menem converting Perons Justicialismo into a Regime that works according to neo liberal economic principles)

    3. Maintain the myth but convert it into something purely ornamental whilst following a practice that makes it largely irrelevant for day to day purposes . ( ´Mao Tse Tung cult in todays China and its adoption of a capitalist market economy).

    What you don’t do is try to use reason and facts to directly confront the beliefs of the hardened fanatic ……it just makes them dig themselves deeper into their fanaticism.!! That doesnt prevent one from exposing the fallacies that feed the myth you mean to debilitate and ultimately destroy. The effect is not inmmediate but in time it makes it easier to debunk the mythology you wish to destroy..!!

    Oh plumb forgot , there is a radical way of uprooting a myth , by killing most of those that profess it , but of course that’s not something our conscience could countenance !!

    • Regarding your last point, that is how the Catholic Church defeated Catharism in Southern Europe. Crude, but effective.

      However, one other method exists to combat bad mythology, and that is promote “critical thinking” in the educational curriculum. You are correct that people are mostly not rational, but this is correctable, to a degree, if you can instill critical thinking skills in children at an early enough age.

      Edward M. Glaser defined this as, “A persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports or refutes it and the further conclusions to which it tends.” In the 1960’s a common counter-culture refrain was, “Question everything.” It can be argued that this produced a lot of social chaos at the time, but that same generation went on to revolutionize the way the entire world lives and works.

      Obviously, this is a long-term proposition. Your other proposals would be more effective in the short-term.

      • Must agree entirely with you Roy that educating people to think critically would be the ultimate solution to the spread of silly myths such as sustain the cult of Chavez. Teaching people to think critically however is not that easy as we all know ,

        I work among people whose profession requires them to think in depth to deal with all sort of difficult non conventional issues …and every day Im surprised that even many whose intellect and professional expertise I admire have a hard time thinking outside the box, scrutinizing problems in a truly critical way ……… and not succumbing to conventional truisms and modes of thought.

        In any event the more one fosters people to learn to think critically the less likely it is that obscene myths will ever take a hold in their minds so its something to go for…!!

        • “To stay young requires unceasing cultivation of the ability to unlearn old falsehoods.”

          I cannot count the number of things that I “knew for certain” and that I subsequently had to “unlearn”. Hard work…

    • Arguments that a leader cannot be held responsible for negative results, so long as his/her actions were well intended, are patently fallacious. This has been encapsulated in the quote, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

  9. Myth in large part because of the billions of $$$ used internally and abroad to market the package. Facts aside, audiences will be predisposed somewhat to lean towards lefties or right wing ileologies depending on their history and also on the moment of the political pendulum. Chile, Peru, Brazil’s and others in upswing to the right it appears, and others like Colombia (referendum pending) to the left, Canada, the US? Etc.

    Chavismo rode a 10x increase in revenues to grease the greatest PR machine seen in a long time, with the left benefiting worldwide. Now days, there is no $$ to counter this broadband of messaging and no new “talent” with Chavez natural histrionic and communicative abilities.

    I totally concur with Coronel et al that the myth must be challenged at every opportunity. There must be basic economic and home finance classes in Primaria to show kids how to balance a budget, and how to invest, sabe and spend according to one means. learning the basics teaches people how to better evaluate planes sauditas y chavistas del silo XXI for waht they are, unsustainable excersices in narcissistic corruption.

  10. No, definitely no.

    Yes, people are emotional but no, they are not idiots. Some of them will never change but a lot will if we explain with good arguments why the myth is a farce and why it is pernicious.

    Bolivar untouchable myth? My foot. Even that can and should be touched. And you know what? It is our ethical imperative to do so. The military caste and many politicians through all political shades won’t like it but it is our duty to tackle matters directly and teach people what really happen.

    The first times people like Diosdado would think we are giving a magical opportunity and create a scene: look at them, how could they dare touch our Bolivarian religion?

    In the fifties there were still lots of Germans who thought Hitler was not that bad. Education has progressively changed that.

  11. Of course you can destroy Chavez’s legacy! WTF are you talking about. It can be done if you work hard. Perhaps some would prefer not to destroy it, but that’ s another matter… Todos los políticos de oposición que quieran aprovecharse para su propio beneficio del “legado”del comandante deberán ser apartados.

  12. With all due respect, I couldn’t be more in disagreement with the author’s position. Then if its meaningless or if it doesn’t cause any effect on dis-mystifying the Chavez-myth why then would you claim that “Chavez did that, Chavez would have done this” as rhetoric. It’s ludicrous. The best course of action is to stop to embellishing this insane fantasy of a country that rose up from the ashes thanks to Chavez, and the humanitarian crisis unfolding currently in Venezuela it’s simply an act of Chavez’s cronies who don’t represent the true ideals of the former’s statesmanship. La barbarie continua…

  13. This subject has been studied extensively by very reputable US psychologists , they ve done a lot of research and published countless studies on what can be done to persuade people who have attached themselves emotionally to a particular creed and the simple answer is that it cant be done through confrontation not because people are dumb but because what makes people tick is not totally rational ……..at most what you can do is try to approach them and ask them how particularly they plan to achieve some specific goal , going to the practical particulars, then maybe you have an opening , but you have to bring the argument down to a practical concrete level or you ve lost them ….!!

    Modern psychology is much more empirically grounded than was the case in the past and since Kahneman and Tersv they understand that human nature is beholden on many irrational biases that cant be controlled through the simple exercise of logic …….!!

    The man to read on this subject is Jonathan Haidt although there are others who have made this topic their lives work……!!

    The Enlightment lovely superstition was that men could be trusted to come to common rational conclusions because they had the faculty of reason to arrive at the right solution . turns out its never been that way , If you distrust social psychologists then another man to read is good old Isaiah Berlin who in some of his essays is very persuasive in making the point that the use of reason doenst have that magical property of allowing people to reach definitive agreements on what is the correct answer to human problems …..!!

    The myth can be debilitated to a degree where it is made harmless, but most men are thick skulled were their prejudices are concerned …….!!

  14. Talking of legacies, it might very well be, that in terms of real influence in the world stage, a beauty queen might well beat the Eternal!

Leave a Reply