Abstract. The article examines the stages of shaping, radicalization and liberalization of the Bolivarian project in Venezuela. H. Chávez, its creator and President of the country from 1998 to 2013, won the presidential election for the first time in December 1998. After the adoption of a new constitution in a referendum and holding parliamentary and gubernatorial elections, he won the presidential election in 2000. Since 2001, he had been conducting a course of strengthening the role of the state in the economy. He had invested significant funds received in the form of revenues from the petroleum industry in social projects, but the needs of the industry itself were not taken into account. In addition, he implemented measures to abandon market-based methods of eco nomic regulation, and since 2007, he had radicalized his course. After H. Chávez death in April 2013, a set of alarming signs were already evident, indicating serious disruptions in the economy. They were strongly connected with the former president’s leadership style, his penchant for conducting experiments that were painful for society. The author concludes that one of the H. Chávez’s main omissions is the insecurity of the petroleum industry (the most important driver of the development of the economy as a whole) with financial resources necessary for the expanded reproduction of oil. This led to a steady decline in its production, starting in 2007. A mistake that had grave consequences was the implementation of the so-called socialism of the 21st century, which resulted in the bankruptcy or expropriation of hundreds of medium and large private enterprises in industry, agriculture and trade. The country’s economy was plunged into a severe and prolonged crisis, exacerbated in 2019 by the imposition of US sanctions. Its revival was facilitated by liberalization measures, including the permission of the dollar circulation in the domestic market. But imposition of a 3% tax on dollar transactions by N. Maduro in 2022 put the recovery process in jeopardy. Comparison of 2000 and 2022 indica tors, characterizing the level of corruption, poverty and income distribution, shows the absence of any progress in their dynamics.