Venezuelans Fear Government Despite Maduro's Exit

The exit of Maduro from power in Venezuela has failed to dispel the atmosphere of fear that has gripped the nation for years. While the political leadership has changed, the underlying structures of state control remain largely untouched. The repressive machinery utilized by the former regime is still in place, functioning as a constant reminder of past authoritarianism.

Many citizens are finding it difficult to embrace the new era with open arms. The psychological impact of years of surveillance and intimidation lingers. Consequently, public celebrations of Maduro's departure have been muted. The population remains cautious, fearing that the mechanisms of repression could be reactivated at any moment. This hesitation highlights the deep scars left by the previous administration on the national psyche.

The departure of Maduro was viewed by many as a turning point for Venezuela. However, the reality on the ground suggests a more complex transition. The infrastructure of control built during his tenure has proven resilient. It has not been dismantled or reformed in the wake of his exit.

This continuity is the primary source of anxiety for the population. The fear is not just of the man who left, but of the system he built. The state apparatus remains capable of monitoring and suppressing dissent. As a result, the joy of liberation is tempered by the reality of continued surveillance.

The persistence of these structures means that the risks associated with political expression remain high. Citizens are evaluating the safety of their actions carefully. The lack of a clear break from the past creates a barrier to full democratic engagement.

The fear gripping Venezuelans is rational and based on recent history. The repressive machinery is not a theoretical concept; it is a tangible reality that affected daily life. The mechanisms of control are deeply embedded in the state's operations.

Several factors contribute to this widespread apprehension:

• The security forces that enforced the previous regime's will remain active.
• The legal framework used to target opponents is still in effect.
• The surveillance networks established to monitor citizens are operational.

These elements combine to create a situation where the threat of retaliation feels immediate. Even without Maduro at the helm, the tools he used to maintain power are still available to the state. This ensures that the culture of fear persists long after the leader has gone.

While the political narrative in Venezuela has shifted, the lived experience of many citizens has not changed fundamentally. The repressive machinery acts as a brake on rapid social and political change. It forces a slow, cautious approach to the new era.

The inability to celebrate openly is a symptom of this deeper issue. It signals a lack of trust in the permanence of the change. For the fear to subside, there must be visible dismantling of the structures that enabled the repression. Until then, the population remains in a state of suspended animation, waiting to see if the new chapter will truly be different.