The adoption of neoliberal policies in Latin America comes at a time of questioning of the development assumptions of the past 40 years. Samir Amin suggests that after the great surge of state-led developmentalism in the 1950s and 1960s, which centered on industrialization, modernization, and the conquest of poverty, the 1980s brought disillusionment: "Developmentalism has broken down, its theory is in crisis, its ideology the subject of doubt" (Amin, 1990b: 17). In Latin America, the postwar pattern of import-substitution development had largely ended by the late 1970s, and the region lapsed into stagnation or negative growth during most of the next decade. In the 1990s Venezuela and its neighbors, heavily indebted and pressured by international financial agencies, cling to open-economy, export-driven development strategies in which the state plays a much less prominent role and the concentration of wealth intensifies. They must carry out these strategies within a global system in which capital, goods, and services flow more freely across the boundaries of sovereign states, particularly those on the periphery. Democratic governments struggle to contain the political fallout from diminished social services and rising poverty, often through authoritarian measures marked by a sharp increase in human rights violations. Domestic politics, however, are closely linked to international forces, rendering obsolete the theoretical perception of internal politics as a purely national matter (Perez, 1993: 4). Venezuela is in the throes of a transition from the populist political and economic model that prevailed until the early 1980s to a new model driven by neoliberal ideology. The political outcome of this transition is uncertain, but its negative impact on human welfare is already clear. Major policy decisions have been made and implemented that diminish the quality of life for a majority of Venezuelans. These decisions are inseparable from the country's democratic experience over 35 years.