LAUSR

espanolDesde el Pacto de Punto Fijo la historia politica de Venezuela revela una cultura pragmatica que privilegia el acuerdo como forma de cambio de situaciones de transicion conflictivas para la sociedad venezolana. Este trabajo aborda la conflictividad politica, social e ideologica que se presento en Venezuela entre 2002 y 2003, analizando las causas de la misma y los hechos implicitos que generaron el golpe de Estado de abril de 2002, el cual evidencio la presencia de dos grupos antagonicos que deseaban prevalecer para imponer su vision del mundo politico. Basandose en el metodo descriptivo-analitico, se estudia la racionalidad conflictiva imperante, determinando los actores, ideologia, acontecimientos y las implicaciones subyacentes; y analizando los inicios de la mediacion internacional y sus efectos. Entre los resultados destacan que la fractura del sistema politico de la Republica puntofijista, el discurso del presidente Chavez y la articulacion de su propuesta politica, fueron factores determinantes del nuevo conflicto; enfrentando dos visiones politicas incompatibles, el socialismo revolucionario y la democracia liberal; concluyendose que la realidad del pais para la epoca era volatil, y la mediacion tuvo que incorporarse a la dinamica coyuntural, dado el alto grado de polarizacion existente, aunque esta produjo un clima de aparente calma. EnglishFrom the Fixed Point Pact, the political history of Venezuela reveals a pragmatic culture that privileges the agreement as a way of changing conflicting transition situations for Venezuelan society. This work addresses the political, social and ideological conflict that occurred in Venezuela between 2002 and 2003, analyzing the causes of it and the implicit facts that generated the coup d’etat of April 2002, which evidenced the presence of two antagonistic groups who wished to prevail to impose their vision of the political world. Based on the descriptive-analytical method, the prevailing conflict rationality is studied, determining the actors, ideology, events and the underlying implications; and analyzing the beginnings of international mediation and its effects. Among the results, it is worth highlighting that the fracture of the political system of the pointofijista Republic, the speech of President Chavez and the articulation of his political proposal were determining factors of the new conflict; facing two incompatible political visions, revolutionary socialism and liberal democracy; concluding that the reality of the country for the time was volatile, and mediation had to be incorporated into the current dynamics, given the high degree of polarization existing, although this produced a climate of apparent calm.