PSUV prepares for transition to socialism

[scarletghoul]

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/4707

On August 1, United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) members across the country participated in 1556 local assemblies to discuss the reorganisation of the party's base into local patrols.
This push to strengthen revolutionary organising comes at a time when attacks on Venezuela's revolutionary process revolution "from outside and within have intensified", Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, also president of the PSUV, said on August 4.

"Each time that the revolution advances and accelerates its march, the attacks intensify.

"I will continue to put my foot down on the accelerator of the Bolivarian revolution. That is my role, that is my task and there is no time to lose.

"Today, in Venezuela, we are creating a true socialist democracy."

After his re-election in the December 2006 presidential elections, Chavez issued a call to build a "new party... from the base" and at the service "of the people and the revolution, at the service of socialism".

As an expression of a deeply felt need for greater revolutionary unity, almost 6 million people enrolled as aspiring PSUV members between April and June, 2007.

Organised into 300-strong local battalions, several hundred thousand aspiring members embarked on the task of building the PSUV, which held its founding congress in early 2008.

However, a national leadership handout distributed at the assemblies said the process of forming battalions had generated "a number of logistical difficulties [that meant] grassroots participation in the battalion meetings profoundly diminished, and in doing so debilitated [their] functioning and political performance".

Drawing on the lessons of previously successful election campaign structures, the leadership announced a re-organisation of the bases, where activists who know each other and live in the same street, block, or local community, were to unite into patrols comprising 20 to 30 members.

The smaller size and self-selecting nature of the process aims to facilitate greater organisational capacity and cohesion.

It is expected between 100,000 to 200,000 patrols will be formed in the lead up to the PSUV's second national congress, scheduled to begin on October 10.

Despite announcements by Jorge Rodriguez, head of the PSUV's national organisation commission, that patrols would only be organised on a territorial basis, representatives of the PSUV's Socialist Workers Front told Green Left Weekly that Chavez proposed they move ahead with forming factory- and workplace-based patrols.

PSUV Youth members have also said they plan to form university and high school patrols. Despite more than 60% of the 1.5 million new members who signed up this year being below the age of 29, youth participation in the assemblies was extremely low.

On the political front, activism in local communities and ideological formation was emphasised. The PSUV leadership document, circulated for discussion at the assemblies, said this was crucial for "accelerating the transition to socialism".

The document said this transition involved "the transformation of the bourgeois state into a revolutionary and democratic state ... the creation of socialist property relations over the means of production ... [and] the creation of revolutionary consciousness in working people [through] a profound ideological and cultural revolution".

[MarxSchmarx]

As an expression of a deeply felt need for greater revolutionary unity, almost 6 million people enrolled as aspiring PSUV members between April and June, 2007.


Not a vanguardist but that number gives me pause. Esp. because that country's population is estimated at about 27 million - almost 1 in 4 Venezuelans want to be a full party member?

If so, it actually is probablematic for another reason. I don't really see what the PSUV will do once Chavez is gone from the scene - it was formulated as an opportunistic electoral coalition of sorts, and its main focus continues to be with political campaigns. Thus, this movement suggests that the way to advance in Venezuela by many is seeing as being a member of a political party. This cannot be healthy for any kind of long term transition.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Even the CPSU deliberately attempted to defend its "vanguard" status by limiting membership to one-tenth of the adult Soviet population.

[Josef Balin]

I honestly don't see why Chavez being a lot more capitalist than China ever was is accepted because, apparently, they need to just stay in power until a time when a goal is fulfilled, and then implement socialism, but when Deng Xiaoping said it or Hu Jintao says it he doesn't get nearly the reaction on revleft.

[Luís Henrique]

I find quite awkward the use of military terms such as "batallion" or "patrol" in this context. Is it poised to be a military or police organisation? If not, why the militaristic jargon?

Luís Henrique

[Pogue]

I find quite awkward the use of military terms such as "batallion" or "patrol" in this context. Is it poised to be a military or police organisation? If not, why the militaristic jargon?

Luís Henrique

Chavez is a military man and regularly employs such language, he is frequently criticised for it.

[JimmyJazz]

I find quite awkward the use of military terms such as "batallion" or "patrol" in this context. Is it poised to be a military or police organisation? If not, why the militaristic jargon?

Luís Henrique

http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-chavez-urges-t114850/index.html

[Luís Henrique]

http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-chavez-urges-t114850/index.html

The Venezolan Army is one thing, a political party is another thing. Or so I would hope.

Luís Henrique

[KC]

When I read the title of this thread I totally thought it was an Onion article.

[New Tet]

Not a vanguardist but that number gives me pause. Esp. because that country's population is estimated at about 27 million - almost 1 in 4 Venezuelans want to be a full party member?

If so, it actually is probablematic for another reason. I don't really see what the PSUV will do once Chavez is gone from the scene - it was formulated as an opportunistic electoral coalition of sorts, and its main focus continues to be with political campaigns. Thus, this movement suggests that the way to advance in Venezuela by many is seeing as being a member of a political party. This cannot be healthy for any kind of long term transition.

It can't be completely unhealthy either. After all, even Marx admitted that eventually the class struggle must assume the form of a political expression. Am I wrong on that?

[scarletghoul]

I find quite awkward the use of military terms such as "batallion" or "patrol" in this context. Is it poised to be a military or police organisation? If not, why the militaristic jargon?
They're talking about armed workers, peoples' militia etc. In other words giving real power to the workers. This will increase democracy and strengthen the workers' movement in Venezuela.
If this can be done then the PSUV could well be transformed into a vanguard party as the country become socialist.

[Enragé]

my question is, who controls these militia's? The militia(wo)men/workers&students in each locality, from below; or the party bureaucracy nationally/the state, from above?

The former would be a great step towards workers' power, the second would only militarise a part of the population under the control of chavez and his friends. Also, are people outside the PSUV also allowed to form militias?

[scarletghoul]

Well this hasn't really started yet so it's hard to tell exactly what's going on, but I remember a few weeks ago Chavez said workers should form workplace militias, which would presumably be independant of the PSUV as not all workers are party members

[MarxSchmarx]

It can't be completely unhealthy either. After all, even Marx admitted that eventually the class struggle must assume the form of a political expression. Am I wrong on that?

Yes indeed. The difference, though, is Marx felt that political expression, as a strong political party in power, would come about as a result of concrete day to day struggles - not as a result of directives from above or as a way for individuals to advance their own careers.

[La Comédie Noire]

Interesting, as events from Venezuela always are, but I remain skeptical. One of the most important questions we should be asking ourselves is "What are the utility and function of these battalions?"

It seems to me Chavez is restructuring the PSUV to better organize support for his regime. While he is giving initiative to people it is still within the context of a bourgeois political party. Once you peel back the layers of socialist rhetoric it may be no different from a respectable grass roots movement.

I have a deep mistrust of the working class, or any class for that matter, being "given" power, simply because the notion is entirely alien to history. Classes struggle for power and when the time comes they take it for themselves.

Not to mention when you compare the PSUV to past parties and movements it's unremarkable. Whether it be radical democratic parties or social democrats.

[Mephisto]

I certainly can not agree to Floyds opinion on class struggle and the working class but I concede to him in the point of the utility and the function of these battalions.

We must not forget, that Venezuela is still a capitalist country and the ALBA States in which it is embedded are very far from being a non-capitalist alliance. As long as this is the case, the PSUV necessarily can not be a true workers party and the gouvernment necessarily must adopt more or less beaurocratic structures.

Don't get me wrong, I support the Bolivarian Process against western imperialism but I think, that we can not bank on the Chavez Gouvernment no matter what comes. I believe Venezuelans road to socialism requires the working class to set up independent class organizations to take over the power when the time is ripe, although this might mean that they have to overthrow the Chavez Gouvernment.

[scarletghoul]

I believe Venezuelans road to socialism requires the working class to set up independent class organizations to take over the power when the time is ripe, although this might mean that they have to overthrow the Chavez Gouvernment. No it means overthrowing the bourgeois state and appropriating the means of production. Chavez's reforms have made this easier to do, and it seems that the PSUV could lead the revolution when it comes.

[scarletghoul]

Anyway did anyone else get slightly turned on by the final paragraph?-

The document said this transition involved "the transformation of the bourgeois state into a revolutionary and democratic state ... the creation of socialist property relations over the means of production ... [and] the creation of revolutionary consciousness in working people [through] a profound ideological and cultural revolution".

[el_chavista]

When I read the title of this thread I totally thought it was an Onion article.
At least Chávez has done a step forward in his rethoric about looking for "our own way to socialism" without being spurred by the "whip of the reaction", as in 2002-2003.

[Luís Henrique]

First, if the problem is the Colombian Army, I think that the Venezolan Army is a sure match for it. Popular militiae would only be useful if and after the regular Army was defeated, and this doesn't even look like a popular militia, but rather a partidary one. And a party militia seems useless in a case of external invasion; it would probably more hinder than help efforts to put up a popular resistance.

Second, if the problem is the opposition, I don't see the formation of a partidary militia as a good thing, but rather as a step into militarisation of the Venezolan political life; something that will invite similar steps by other parties.

And I would have to ask, what is the military opinion about such militia? I wouldn't like to see a military coup on the pretext that the militia is "usurping" the Army functions.

Luís Henrique

[La Comédie Noire]

No it means overthrowing the bourgeois state and appropriating the means of production. Chavez's reforms have made this easier to do, and it seems that the PSUV could lead the revolution when it comes.

I'm not so sure, for one Chavez hasn't dismantled the army or the bureaucracy. Perhaps it's only a matter of time, but eventually Chavez will have to put his money where his mouth is.

Let's say these battalions do create a demand and opportunity for genuine workers' self management. What would Chavez's response be?

I think he'd ask the battalions to stop because "the time is not ripe for revolution" or "the danger of imperialism is to great." If they refused to desist, he'd send the army in, brutally suppress it, probably arrest a few "ring leaders" and denounce them as CIA agitators and have them killed.

This is if the workers decide to mount a serious rebellion, they could always just roll over, like the Shanghai Commune did. And then there's always a chance they could fight and win.

Either way I don't think it will involve Chavez giving the power to the working class.

[h0m0revolutionary]

All this talk of Chavez initiating socialism from above is making me ill, so just a friendly reminder of what a vile man he is and what a sham government his iron hand rules over:

http://libcom.org/library/venezuela-behind-smokescreen

[LeninBalls]

Libcom is easily the most trustworthy unbiased leftist source around.

Not that I love Chavez or anything but seriously though, what do you hope to achieve by posting a link to an Anarchist news site criticizing Chavez? Do you think everyone thinks you're right, or people's opinions will change?

[MarxSchmarx]

Let's say these battalions do create a demand and opportunity for genuine workers' self management. What would Chavez's response be?

I think he'd ask the battalions to stop because "the time is not ripe for revolution" or "the danger of imperialism is to great." If they refused to desist, he'd send the army in, brutally suppress it, probably arrest a few "ring leaders" and denounce them as CIA agitators and have them killed.

This is if the workers decide to mount a serious rebellion, they could always just roll over, like the Shanghai Commune did. And then there's always a chance they could fight and win.

Either way I don't think it will involve Chavez giving the power to the working class.

This is part of the problem for having battalions originate from the party in power. Unfortunately, they won't ever get to that stage, because the bosses will see to it that local initiative operates within appropriate parameters. What we can hope for, at best, is that these spur the creation of parallel institutions that could facilitate a transition to socialism.

However, the analogy to China is intriguing. But there's an important difference. Part of the reason there was such a disconnect between the leadership and the grassroots was because the middle bureaucrats told the higher ups what they wanted to hear, while lower level cadres had no way to get their message to the top, or had to do so through intermediaries. Under such organizational structures, it's only a matter of time before the perceptions diverge at different poles. In Venezuela, with freedom of the press and speech, it's unlikely that such strong differences could develop. Ironically, this helps strength the party's bureaucratic structure.

[h0m0revolutionary]

Libcom is easily the most trustworthy unbiased leftist source around.

Not that I love Chavez or anything but seriously though, what do you hope to achieve by posting a link to an Anarchist news site criticizing Chavez? Do you think everyone thinks you're right, or people's opinions will change?

It's not wirtten by anybody active on or around Libcom, it's posted onto that site. It was written by anarchist group El Libertero, who have been first hand victims of Chavez's intolerence towards those leftists who don't see the compatability with Marxism/Communism and a wet pseudo-socialist, state capitalist, power gorging government.

I don't expect opinions to change, I would hope it makes for refreshing reading though after all the cult of personailty type hero worship one often finds about Chavez on here.

[KC]

Not that I love Chavez or anything but seriously though, what do you hope to achieve by posting a link to an Anarchist news site criticizing Chavez? Do you think everyone thinks you're right, or people's opinions will change?

Every article you read is going to be biased to some extent, so why would you expect that the user that posted a link to the LibCom article tried claiming it was unbiased? The point is that the LibCom article does make some very valid points. Let me quote from the article:


These programmes are largely financed through oil money, which has finally started to slowly trickle down to the poor especially after the “nationalisation” of the oil industry. I say “nationalisation” but in reality I am talking about mixed business ventures with multinationals, of which the government has a slightly larger cut. Both parties are satisfied with the deal. The multinationals are guaranteed profits, albeit smaller than before, whilst Chavez can claim that now the oil belongs to the people. These manoeuvres are just one example illustrating the centrality of populism above real results. After all, as Business Week points out, Chavez is “not so bad for business.[ii]”


This is completely true. The Venezuelan government announces its intention to 'nationalize' a company, they enter into negotiations with the corporation and settle on a reasonable price, and purchase 51% of it, giving them control. If you think that this is a "socialist" measure then you are as delusional as those on the right that claim that Obama is a socialist for "nationalizing" the American auto industry.


Now, what is also interesting is that not here on RevLeft, nor anywhere else, have I seen reports on how these companies are restructured following 'nationalization,' if indeed they are restructured at all. I have seen some reports about workers' cooperatives, of course, but these are not relevant when we are discussing, say, PDVSA, the oil company that basically drives the Venezuelan economy.


Now, in this section the article goes on to criticize Chavez for corruption, which I don't necessarily think is fair; corruption, of course, is a very real issue in South American countries, going back decades upon decades. I don't expect Chavez to fix this problem any time soon, if indeed he is trying (I still cannot tell if his party is actually attempting to battle corruption or merely exploiting it in order to get rid of opposition leaders).


Meh, I was going to go through the whole article but I got lazy and don't feel like it anymore.

[el_chavista]

First, if the problem is the Colombian Army, I think that the Venezolan Army is a sure match for it.
Hopefully, this "equilibrium" will prevent a war.

Popular militiae would only be useful if and after the regular Army was defeated, and this doesn't even look like a popular militia, but rather a partidary one. And a party militia seems useless in a case of external invasion; it would probably more hinder than help efforts to put up a popular resistance.

Second, if the problem is the opposition , I don't see the formation of a partidary militia as a good thing, but rather as a step into militarisation of the Venezolan political life; something that will invite similar steps by other parties.

And I would have to ask, what is the military opinion about such militia? I wouldn't like to see a military coup on the pretext that the militia is "usurping" the Army functions.

Luís Henrique

I think an irregular army parallel to the traditional army of the State is a "must have" in any "revolutionary situation".