So, anarcho-capitalism?

I'm not sure where you read capitalism into that.  But, anarchy, yes.  

Actually, there may be a theoretical scenario where government exists but does not coerce anyone.  Seems unlikely, but I guess we could come up with some scenario that fits the bill eventually.  So, we could use the term voluntaryism in stead.  

I think the awareness about the causes of the situation is increasing. It's a slow change, but I'm confident that it is happening. For the first time we are seeing huge political figures going to jail and I think the Brazilian people is getting fed up with the politicians and will demand some change. Brazilians just need to get serious about who they vote for in all elections. Guys like Cunha, Collor, Aécio, Maluf, all elected by popular vote. The people elect known corrupts and then wants to complain about corruption.

Blaming the US for the Venezuelan situation is far fetched. Venezuela has a fragile economy, extremely dependent on oil. A sharp price decrease combined with Maduro destroying the small industry of the country resulted in a deep crisis. He also rigged elections and changed the constitution to remain in power. He is simply a corrupt dictator that is getting rich and making all his friends and family rich while starving the country. 

But most issues are more related to Maduro's incompetency. Morales is doing well in Bolivia. But you can argue that he follows a different socialism line, more akin to the Leninist policy on the 1920s that led to the URSS becoming a big power. He basically leaves small and medium business alone to work and operate. The US would also be interested in taking Morales down, since he is also socialist, anti-US, a big Fidel Castro fan and had conflicts with the US when he refused to stop the production of Coca.

While the US sanction make things worse, we are reaching the point where other countries really have to intervene before he starves his population to death. I don't think the US will take any military action, since that would be a diplomatic problem with the rest of Latin America. So yes, things will stay like this for a while. For the US, they do have interest in replacing guys like Morales and Maduro. But their approach to Latin America is way more hands-off since the end of the Cold War, so I think the Venezuelan crisis has nothing to do with the US. Sanctions or not, things would be as bad as they are now.

It's also becoming a huge issue for other Latin countries. Brazil has more than 40,000 refugees in the North region. We can have a major South American migrant crisis.

Yet, how can people properly choose their leaders if they dont have the proper education and knowledge to do it? Most of the population is very poor and of course targets of populism specially if you promise to give them something like a house, money or whatever. Thats why usually you see that in richer areas populism is much weaker than in poor areas.

So when you say "lets take back Petrobras from the capitalist pigs americans, the oil is ours" I understand why people believe it and go with those ideas. Its easy to appeal. Just education and knoledge can counter it. 

Anyway... lets wait and see what will happen in the future.  

The part in bold is the biggest issue, by far. But I think the people are learning that the current politicians are all crooks. Now, they have to understand that, in the next election, they shouldn't vote for these crooks.

Brazilians with more education are quickly moving to more Liberal approaches, focusing on decrease state intervention and reducing the bureaucracy in the country. I think this approach may start to gain traction with the general public due to the discredit of the political class. Then the people will understand that our government is too incompetent and corrupt to provide anything, so we should at least pay less taxes and have to deal with less bureaucracy.

I also think that the big entrepreneurs should have a bigger involvement with politics. If the government insists on failing budget targets, they will drag the economy down more and companies will suffer. Political parties like the Novo should receive more support from this segment of the society. It's in their interests and the general public will also benefit from increased industrial activity. While I'm not a big fan of the MBL approach, I also recon that they brought awareness to the Liberal cause.

We got some big improvements already. The labor reform at least included the co-responsibility of legal costs, so now a worker that starts a lawsuit for no valid reason has to pay the costs if he loses. Half of the labor lawsuits in the world used to happen in Brazil. The early 2018 reports point to a reduction of 50% to 60% and that's an amazing result.

Bold: I am blaming the US for it's foreign policy, I've touched upon how Venezuela caused it's own economic problems in other posts. I am not sure how you can say that US has nothing to do with Venezuela when the US has become an involved party in the Venezuelan crisis, that just doesn't really make any sense.

Venezuela is a country of geopolitical significance, the country has massive oil and natural gas reserves but has managed not only to remain out of the US sphere of influence but work against it. Meanwhile Russia has been helping to prop up the regime in Venezuela to maintain the balance of power in the region. Military intervention in Venezuela would go poorly and it would probably help to actually unify Venezuela behind Maduro since the US would essentially be proving him right that the US is attempting to directly sink the country. Like Libya and Syria, the best time for intervention is during a civil war where it would help to give some legitimacy to the opposition and provide a casus belli to the international community. For now, the US can use it's economic power to pressure Venezuela, which is exactly what it is doing.

What I mean is that they are involved now, trying to achieve some objectives (getting rid of Maduro). I'm just pointing that the whole crisis didn't started because of the US and even if there was zero US involvement it would still be almost as bad as it is now (and it seems we agree on that).

I also agree that military action would be a disaster for US foreign relations, specially with Latin America. The US is linked to several coups and is also not considered a reliable ally (Falkland war situation, that resulted in Latin countries refusing to help the US with Iraq and the end of the Rio treaty). But since the end of the Cold War the relations seem to have healed a bit, so it wouldn't be on their best interests to ruin this. 

I would say that the country the US fears most in relation to Latin America is not Russia, but China. While the Bolivarian governments seem to have an infatuations with the old URSS idea, the real treat to US hegemony in the region is Chinese money. With Trump avoiding trading deals or simply exiting existing ones, China is an interesting partner with plenty of demand for Latin exports.

Anyway, I don't think the Venezuela situation will escalate to a Civil War. We will probably see a coup (US involved or not with it) in the next few years.

China is definitely the main economic adversary to the US, since Russia's economy is only the size of Australia's. But I would lump China and Russia together because while they're not technically allies, both powers have been working together against the US. Russian or Chinese actions are often followed upon by each other since they are much stronger together than separate. China has the money, Russia has the connections.

As you said with Trump, he has created an opening for his rivals to swoop in and I'm sure they will do everything in their power so Trump's successor will be helpless to stop them.

Russia is, at least, way more keen in directly challenging the US. China is more reserved, but it is quickly challenging the US economic hegemony. Russia is in a relative economic crisis. But yes, they seem to be on the same page and share a common "enemy", so they will pretty much act together from now on. China also is not only in a good economic situation, but they also have their most powerful leader in decades. Jinping is clearly intending to change China's status as local power to a global superpower. Even in Latin America, it's incredible how much China is investing. And I'm really not complaining, for most countries here it is great to diversify economic relations. The US and the EU are always trying to protect their own agriculture while demanding lower taxes for their own products. I think Latin countries will be able to negotiate better terms with China. The US always treated the region as an afterthought and focused on its OTAN friends, so maybe it's time for the emergent countries to negotiate with each other instead of dealing with the old geopolitics.

I got to say that people in the US should be more cautious about Trump. It's clear now that Putin employed a lot of effort and money in rigging the US elections to make Trump win. He risked a diplomatic crisis when doing so. The only remaining question is what was Trump's role on this mess. Is he just an useful idiot, so Putin wanted him to win so he would take the US in bad directions and weaken its global influence? Or is he somewhat connected to the Russians, which has some serious implications? I also believe that Trump could actually be innocent, but Putin manipulated the situation to make it look otherwise. The thing here is that Trump is not that brilliant and has zero experience with politics (being a businessman is a whole different thing), while Putin is an extremely capable politician and manipulator. I think people fail to realize how dangerous Putin can be when you're his enemy.