Venezuela Celebrates Day of the Bolivarian Militias

[The Vegan Marxist]

Venezuela Celebrates ‘Day of the Bolivarian Militias, the Armed People and the April Revolution’
By KIRAZ JANICKE – VENEZUELANALYSIS.COM

Caracas, April 14, 2010 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuela celebrated eight years since a popular uprising defeated a U.S. backed coup against President Hugo Chavez in April 2002 with a swearing in ceremony of 35,000 new militia members denominated the “Day of the Bolivarian Militias, the Armed People and the April Revolution” in centre Caracas, yesterday.

Shortly after being elected in 1998, Chavez, who leads a process of radical social change known as the Bolivarian revolution, initiated a series of pro-poor reforms that brought him into conflict with U.S. and local Venezuelan elites.

On April 11, 2002, the shooting of nineteen people by opposition snipers and metropolitan police officers was used as a pretext to spark a military revolt by rightwing generals who kidnapped Chavez and tried to force him to resign. Pedro Carmona, head of the Chamber of Commerce (FEDECAMARAS) declared himself interim President, issued a decree dissolving the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the National Assembly and fired the Ombudsman and the Attorney General.

During the coup hundreds of Chavez supporters were rounded up and imprisoned and state and community media outlets were shut down, while the opposition-controlled private media imposed a blackout. The United States was one of few countries to recognise the illegal government, claiming “a democratic transition” had taken place.

The coup collapsed after only 47 hours when masses of poor Venezuelans came out onto the streets in protest and loyal sections of the armed forces retook the presidential palace and the Fuerte Tiuna military base in Caracas.

Recalling the events of April 2002 yesterday, Chavez said the Venezuelan oligarchy had conspired with U.S. imperialism to disrespect the will of the Venezuelan people and overthrow the democratically elected government.

"It was a fascist coup with the warships of Yankee imperialism in Maiquetía, and submarines and aircraft carriers in Venezuelan waters, the entire oligarchy, political parties, the media and political and economic elites were allied against the Venezuelan people," he said.

He also lamented the lives of the Venezuelans who died during the coup saying “those brave people gave their lives to defend this process” but stressed that the "fascist coup unleashed the power contained within the people and the Armed Forces."

It was this “civic- military alliance” that was central to the defeat of the coup Chavez argued.

“The oligarchy and imperialism had predicted that if the people went out the streets as they did during the Caracazo [uprising in 1989 under former president Carlos Andrés Pérez, when an estimated 3,000 people were killed by the military]...they thought they could count on the guns of our soldiers to curb the popular rebellion, but they had a big surprise because, despite more than 100 traitorous generals and admirals caving in to the bourgeoisie, the soldiers not only refused to commit a massacre but placed themselves and their guns on the side of the people,” he said.

Now, with the formation of the Bolivarian Militia, he argued, “The militia is the people and the people are the militia, the armed people and the armed forces are one.”

As he swore in the 35,000 militia from student battalions, combat corps, and worker and peasant battalions, Chavez also stressed the large numbers of women in the militias, saying, “I'm proud to know that there are many women among them in the ranks, giving greater strength, vigour and passion to the task of the struggle for sovereignty and independence of the country.”

He also drew attention to the continued threat of U.S. intervention in Venezuela pointing to the increased U.S. militarization of the region and saying that the U.S., the Venezuelan opposition and some neighbouring countries, including Colombia, are still plotting to destabilise and attack Venezuela.

In 2009 the U.S. signed a deal to install seven new military bases in Colombia, including on the Venezuelan border, 4 new military bases in Panama, and is currently pursuing military discussions with the Peruvian and Brazilian governments.

Outlining some of the achievements of the Bolivarian Revolution over the past decade including the halving of poverty rates, the eradication of illiteracy and the provision of free universal healthcare among other things, Chavez reaffirmed that the goal of the Bolivarian revolution is to build socialism.

"The only way for us to have a homeland is by building socialism of the 21st century here in Venezuela,” he said, adding that it was not easy.

In this context increased political consciousness and unity are necessary “to defeat imperialism and the local bourgeoisie,” Chavez stressed.

Chavez urged the Venezuelan people to support candidates from his United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) in the upcoming national assembly elections in September in order “to accelerate the transformation in the country and consolidate the revolution.”

A pro-revolution majority in the September elections will prevent the bourgeoisie from gaining space to promote their destabilising actions and from “using the legislature to achieve their nefarious purposes," he explained.

As part of a series of events commemorating the coup one hundred young community media activists were also sworn in as “communicational guerrillas” on Sunday to raise awareness amongst young people about “media lies” and combat the anti-revolution campaign of the opposition controlled private media in Venezuela.

Rosa Martinez, a 60 year-old Chavez supporter from the working class neighbourhood of Petare, in Caracas, who attend the swearing in ceremony of the militias, told Venezuelanalysis.com, “There is a big international media campaign against Venezuela, against our president, against our people, but the reality is quite different to what the media says.”

http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5276

[The Vegan Marxist]

http://venezuelanalysis.com/files/imagecache/images_set/images/2010/04/DSC_6197.jpg

[RadioRaheem84]

Sweet!

[The Vegan Marxist]

A communal militia, operated of the majority, by peasants & workers alike. Any arguments made against Chavez & Venezuela about the workers not being armed have now been refuted! Good day to all of you!

[Nolan]

http://venezuelanalysis.com/files/imagecache/images_set/images/2010/04/DSC_6197.jpg

Why do those look like the Spanish fascist flag?

[The Vegan Marxist]

Why do those look like the Spanish fascist flag?

The red ones? lol

Update: oh, you mean the red & yellow ones haha. yeah...awkward.

[Nolan]

The red ones? lol

No, the red/yellow ones that look just like the Spanish flag.

[The Vegan Marxist]

No, the red/yellow ones that look just like the Spanish flag.

yeah, I noticed. that's why I put an update to my last post haha. I'm not too sure what they are. If you look closely, you'll see that' it's not the spanish one I don't think, but I am curious to what exactly it is.

[vyborg]

quite impressive. the workers' militia could be the beginning of a new army that is a new state. so much for chavez as a "populist bonapartist"

[Ligeia]

yeah, I noticed. that's why I put an update to my last post haha. I'm not too sure what they are. If you look closely, you'll see that' it's not the spanish one I don't think, but I am curious to what exactly it is.
It's the flag of the UPV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_Popular_Unity) which seems to be a party which did belong to the PSUV but doesn't anymore, nonetheless it supports Chavez.

You can see them better in this video:
rEjw21KZtIs

[danyboy27]

too bad those milita are controlled by a single individual,general Félix Antonio Velásquez.

[Leo]

http://venezuelanalysis.com/files/imagecache/images_set/images/2010/04/DSC_6197.jpg

A communal militia, operated of the majority, by peasants & workers alike. Any arguments made against Chavez & Venezuela about the workers not being armed have now been refuted! Good day to all of you!

Yes, because a military parade proves that the army is being operated by the peasants and workers!

http://www.asianews.it/files/img/N.COREA_%28F%29_-_Military_Parade.jpg

http://www.dcpages.com/gallery/d/78580-2/DSC00666.jpg

:rolleyes:

[RadioRaheem84]

Huge difference! If you don't know why, then you probably never will.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Yes, because a military parade proves that the army is being operated by the peasants and workers!

http://www.asianews.it/files/img/N.COREA_%28F%29_-_Military_Parade.jpg

http://www.dcpages.com/gallery/d/78580-2/DSC00666.jpg

:rolleyes:

Wow... you're comparing the U.S. military parade conducted in D.C. to the workers & peasants militias taking place in Venezuela...I'd put a facepalm picture in this thread right now, but I'm sure I'd get written up because I'd be considered as a "troll" for some stupid reason.

[the last donut of the night]

I think this is a significant step, because now you have armed workers with a high degree of class consciousness. Chavez makes one mistake, and they will be ready.

[RedScare]

Shoo, Chavez is doing well. Even if they under the command of a single General, the simple fact that the militias exist is a great step forward.

[Robocommie]

I think this is a significant step, because now you have armed workers with a high degree of class consciousness. Chavez makes one mistake, and they will be ready.

Exactly, this is what I don't get. If Chavez is amping up the rhetoric, and the militia are really getting into it, and now they're being trained how to fight and use guns, even if they are under the theoretical control of a single general, what does it matter? They're on the way to becoming a revolutionary guard.

Some people seem to think that because the militias are technically attached to the state, it's as if these guys will suddenly decide to lay down and die if the Venezuelan oligarchs make a move against them or the Bolivarian Revolution. That makes no sense.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Exactly, this is what I don't get. If Chavez is amping up the rhetoric, and the militia are really getting into it, and now they're being trained how to fight and use guns, even if they are under the theoretical control of a single general, what does it matter? They're on the way to becoming a revolutionary guard.

Some people seem to think that because the militias are technically attached to the state, it's as if these guys will suddenly decide to lay down and die if the Venezuelan oligarchs make a move against them or the Bolivarian Revolution. That makes no sense.

These are the same arguments made like the ones that the State is NATURALLY evil & is only oppressive no matter who operates it. No, forget science & the psychological state of environmental conditions. We'll just blame nature & "human nature" on why CAPITALIST-states don't work. :thumbup1:

[The Douche]

There are still lots of things you guys should be asking before endorsing this as the end all be all of revolution.

How are these units structured? Professional officers? Pay? How are the arms held? Are they possesed in the homes of the workers, or locked up in armories? Who controls the armories, workers, the militias, the army?

These are important issues that can help to determine the relationship of the militias to the working class.

[Robocommie]

There are still lots of things you guys should be asking before endorsing this as the end all be all of revolution.


That's not fair, I don't think anyone here is saying this is in any way the model or ideal revolution. I for one don't believe the ideal revolution exists. I think we're all simply excited about what's happening in Venezuela and feel optimistic about the future.

As for the rest, well naturally those things will all affect the revolutionary nature of the militias, but let's remember that one of their stated purposes was to protect the land redistribution efforts of Mission Zamora from the hired mercenaries of wealthy land owners, who have murdered 130 Venezuelan farmers since 1999. I mean, c'mon. If that's not revolutionary in its very essence than what is?

[The Douche]

That's not fair, I don't think anyone here is saying this is in any way the model or ideal revolution. I for one don't believe the ideal revolution exists. I think we're all simply excited about what's happening in Venezuela and feel optimistic about the future.

As for the rest, well naturally those things will all affect the revolutionary nature of the militias, but let's remember that one of their stated purposes was to protect the land redistribution efforts of Mission Zamora from the hired mercenaries of wealthy land owners, who have murdered 130 Venezuelan farmers since 1999. I mean, c'mon. If that's not revolutionary in its very essence than what is?

Its not particularly revolutionary if these are just part-time soldiers (ala the US national guard), its also potentially a bad development if they are accountable to the state/army and not the workers/peasants directly.

[Robocommie]

Its not particularly revolutionary if these are just part-time soldiers (ala the US national guard), its also potentially a bad development if they are accountable to the state/army and not the workers/peasants directly.

I mean hey, anything can potentially be a bad development, even the best laid plans can backfire. But I see no reason to be so cynical from the very start. Chavez starts by trying to revive Venezuelan agriculture by redistributing the land - the landlords get pissed off and hire gunmen to try and intimidate peasants, killing a lot of them in the process. Chavez says, fuck that, give the peasants guns. How is this not a positive development when viewed in that context?

Cmoney, comrade, I understand you're an anarchist, but what do you really think Chavez is going to start doing? Ordering the militias to start shaking down their own families for rent money? And do you really think they'd comply in even that unlikely of scenarios?

[Devrim]

A communal militia, operated of the majority, by peasants & workers alike. Any arguments made against Chavez & Venezuela about the workers not being armed have now been refuted! Good day to all of you!

There is a massive Army in the US, mainly made up of working class people. Surprisingly all bourgeois armies are mainly made up of working class people.


Huge difference! If you don't know why, then you probably never will.

If you don't see why they are fundamentally the same, then hopefully will in the future.

Devrim

[vyborg]

here (http://www.marxist.com/venezuela-the-people-in-arms.htm) an explanation of what is different..

[Devrim]

here (http://www.marxist.com/venezuela-the-people-in-arms.htm) an explanation of what is different..

I don't quite understand how Alan Woods' holiday snaps and a little rambling can explain anything about the class nature of the Venezuelan state.

Devrim

[vyborg]

We must be concrete. A capitalist state is not very happy to have tens of thousands of workers armed not as soldiers but as workers. Tell me when you will look something like what happened in Venezuela in another country.

This is not a military parade but a proletarian show of strenght.

does this episode resolve the problem? Of course it doesnt. But how can we compare the situation in Venezuela to the situation of an ordinary capitalist country? this is ridicolous.

The bourgeois in Venezuela doesnt have full control on their state. This is a foundamental turing point. It is transitional, partial, subjected to coming back, and still, as revolutionary people, we must look at this demo as a very important one

[Leo]

Wow... you're comparing the U.S. military parade conducted in D.C. to the workers & peasants militias taking place in Venezuela...Very observant.


We must be concrete. A capitalist state is not very happy to have tens of thousands of workers armed not as soldiers but as workers.All capitalist states are happy to have militia style support troops. The example of the US National Guard was given. I can add that of the Basj Militia in Iran, Village Guards in the Turkish Kurdistan, the Patriotic Guard in Stalinist Romania as a few more examples. Having loyal and armed semi-civilian supporters is something every bourgeois state wants. Those of the Chavist militia are no more there with their identity as workers as members of any other militia, such militias are no more proletarian organizations than any other army, and the Chavist regime is no more a proletarian state than any capitalist state.

[vyborg]

Those of the Chavist militia are no more there with their identity as workers as members of any other militia, such militias are no more proletarian organizations than any other army, and the Chavist regime is no more a proletarian state than any capitalist state.

That's why impetialists hate Chavez because he is just like anyother else.

As for the comparison between Basji and chavista militia. If we use this comparison a picket defended by armed workers is exactly like a group of fashist thugs. both armed both angy. So what's the difference?

[Ravachol]

That's why impetialists hate Chavez because he is just like anyother else.

As for the comparison between Basji and chavista militia. If we use this comparison a picket defended by armed workers is exactly like a group of fashist thugs. both armed both angy. So what's the difference?

What is probably meant is what cmoney expressed best in this thread, without the name-calling and snearing. Whilst i'm slightly optimistic about Venezuela (as far as Anarchist optimism regarding a state of any kind goes, of course) I still have questions regarding the structure of these militias. True worker's militias composed of and controlled by the workers themselves would be a very welcome development when they have access to weapons themselves. Basji style militias however would be a disaster.

[Uppercut]

I think a lot of people here are still forgetting the class nature of these militias. Yes, the Basij and the anti-naxalite civilians in India are tools of the state, but I'm guessing most of those that participate in these militias are not class conscious and are from a semi-feudalistic background or caste. The Venezuelan militia, on the hand, looks very class conscious and are aware that the state has an obligation to the defense of the working class. The government simply can't backhand these militias and start using them for genocide, or whatever else anyone is worried about. They simply wouldn't stand for that. I can't see it happening.

[vyborg]

The nature of this militia is very clear: they stand for socialism and workers revolution. The comparison with reactionary thugs like basji or with an imperialist army is a non sense.

Of course they are not perfect but they are a step in the right direction

[danyboy27]

I think a lot of people here are still forgetting the class nature of these militias. Yes, the Basij and the anti-naxalite civilians in India are tools of the state, but I'm guessing most of those that participate in these militias are not class conscious and are from a semi-feudalistic background or caste. The Venezuelan militia, on the hand, looks very class conscious and are aware that the state has an obligation to the defense of the working class. The government simply can't backhand these militias and start using them for genocide, or whatever else anyone is worried about. They simply wouldn't stand for that. I can't see it happening.
well, those irregulars have military training, training that learn you to OBEY to the chain of command, OBEY to your officier, OBEY to your general.

Like every irregular troops, their logistic depend of the governement for food, money and weapons.

[The Douche]

Sweet jesus, the point posters like myself and Leo are trying to make is not that the militias are somehow inherently "bad" or that they will be used for something sinister.

There are a number of poster jumping for joy at this development because they see it as the arming of the working class. And maybe thats what it is, and if it is then I support it.

BUT

We do not know if that is what it is. For all we know these organizations are semi-professional, controlled by an officer corps, and accountable to the state, not the working class, and the weapons are held under control of the regular army of the state. And if that is the case (if they fill a role like the US national guard) then there is nothing to be particularly excited about, and it is not the arming of the working class.

[Jazzratt]

The nature of this militia is very clear: they stand for socialism and workers revolution.

If that is the case why do they occupy an auxilliary position? Why are they directly answerable to a state rather than to the workers directly? They might well stand for what Chavez tells them is socialism or workers revolution but there's a pretty large gulf between that and what you're saying.

[Robocommie]

We do not know if that is what it is. For all we know these organizations are semi-professional, controlled by an officer corps, and accountable to the state, not the working class, and the weapons are held under control of the regular army of the state. And if that is the case (if they fill a role like the US national guard) then there is nothing to be particularly excited about, and it is not the arming of the working class.

I appreciate your point, and you're not wrong. I do, however, think it's very important to remember that since these militias, these Brigades of Rural Security, were set up to protect the villagers and the land redistribution of Mission Zamora, it really only makes sense that the guns are held by the farmers, composed of the farmers, and led by the farmers, because that's the only way it could actually serve a purpose as a defense against mercenary thugs in the isolated countryside.

It's frustrating because Googling for "Brigades of Rural Security" brought me back only four hits, and they're all basically the same Wikipedia entries about Mission Zamora that merely states Chavez created the Brigades in response to the violence. There seems to be a complete lack of information in English on this, so I will admit that a lot of this is speculation based on what little we've been shown by articles that our comrades have posted.

[Robocommie]

This is nothing new, but I thought it would be good to repost this for the sake of discussion.

http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5150




http://venezuelanalysis.com/files/imagecache/block_node_images/images/2010/02/venezuela-milicias-21-2-2010-300x199.jpg

Caracas, February 22, 2010 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced the creation of a new Peasant Militia, which will form part of the national Bolivarian Armed Forces (FAB) and also enacted the new Law of the Federal Government Council, during a ceremony to commemorate 151 years since the Federal War lead by peasant leader General Ezequiel Zamora in Venezuela on Saturday.

The peasant militia will be responsible for protecting poor farmers from mercenary groups organized and financed by ranchers and wealthy landowners, Chavez explained in his weekly column, “Chavez’s Lines” on Sunday. More than 300 peasant leaders and activists have been murdered since the government introduced the Law on Land and Agricultural Development in 2001 and launched a program of agrarian reform.

Some 1,505 farms totalling 2.5 million hectares have been recovered and redistributed under the agrarian reform program. However, “The landowning oligarchy launched a violent agenda against the rescue of the commons,” Chavez said.

Manuel Heredia, president of the National Ranchers Federation responded that “As an institution, we have never sought paramilitary groups to protect us,” but he did not rule out the possibility that individual members maybe be involved in financing paramilitary groups, saying, “If one of our members is proven guilty of a crime, then they should pay for their crime.”

Chavez argued, “Faced with the backlash against the peasants through an escalation of attacks, sabotage, and paid assassinations by the most retrograde forces in our society, the non-delegable duty of the Bolivarian national state and the revolutionary government is to protect the peasantry: to defend them with all means at its disposal.”

“The peasant militia has been created to fulfil that duty, placing emphasis on the protagonism and responsibility of the peasantry as a collective subject in function of their own defence,” the president continued.You know though, whatever these militias do represent, I will say this; I LOVE that picture.

[vyborg]

If that is the case why do they occupy an auxilliary position? Why are they directly answerable to a state rather than to the workers directly? They might well stand for what Chavez tells them is socialism or workers revolution but there's a pretty large gulf between that and what you're saying.

What does it means "to workers directly"? Concretely, not in your book of tales. I will tell you what does it means in the real world: elect officers, for instance, a connection between unions and armed battalion etc. This is the direction, not criticizing the only country where the president proposed the creation of such a thing.

What Chavez tell to the workers in Venezuela is pretty good most of the times. He speaks about the need to overthrow capitalism, to destroy imperialism and so on. The problem is not what he tells, the problem is what he does.

That's why armed militia are a very good thing.

[pranabjyoti]

I think a lot of people here are still forgetting the class nature of these militias. Yes, the Basij and the anti-naxalite civilians in India are tools of the state, but I'm guessing most of those that participate in these militias are not class conscious and are from a semi-feudalistic background or caste. The Venezuelan militia, on the hand, looks very class conscious and are aware that the state has an obligation to the defense of the working class. The government simply can't backhand these militias and start using them for genocide, or whatever else anyone is worried about. They simply wouldn't stand for that. I can't see it happening.
Something to add. The anti-naxalite "public" militia is mainly composed by lumpens. As per Marx, this lumpens are nothing nothing but "sludge" of the working class. Some people here just forgot this Marxist view.

[pranabjyoti]

well, those irregulars have military training, training that learn you to OBEY to the chain of command, OBEY to your officier, OBEY to your general.

Like every irregular troops, their logistic depend of the governement for food, money and weapons.
Difference is that, as they are trained enough, on demand they themselves can arrange for their food, logistics, money and weapon. If parties who are engaged in guerrilla war can do that even by standing against government and by people without any kind of training, then this militia can certainly do so and I hope so because they know where to find arms, logistics and food. Bourgeoisie and imperialist governments worldwide just create their army and train them is such a way, that they are nearly about totally aloof from their class base and common people of their country. But, as per the news, the persons engaged in this militia is taking part in it as a secondary occupation. Their primary occupation is either working in fields or in factories i.e. they will still remain in their own class and THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE IN MY OPINION.

[Robocommie]

But, as per the news, the persons engaged in this militia is taking part in it as a secondary occupation. Their primary occupation is either working in fields or in factories i.e. they will still remain in their own class and THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE IN MY OPINION.

You know, that's a very good point.

[pranabjyoti]

You know, that's a very good point.
If not, then calling them "peasants militia" is useless. Chavez can easily call for a rise in Police, para-military and military forces. The word "militia" always means that the persons engaged in this type of armed group may be armed, but their real occupation is something other. Otherwise, the word "militia" can not be used here.
Actually, the whole debate, in my opinion in this thread is concentrated on whether this is a "militia" or some protrusion of state armed forces. I don't think Venezuela has so much economic growth to increase its armed forces and can continue the social reform programme side by side. Therefor, at least my common sense says that there is a high chance of it being a REAL MILITIA.

[RadioRaheem84]

The comparisons to the US National Guard are getting fucking annoying. There is an obvious difference between the imperialist domestic front of the US and these militias for crying out loud.

Like CMoney said, I and probably others are not trying to mark this the Holy Grail of revolutionary movements in this era but that there should be support for the Venezuelan people in their attempt to protect what little they've created through a, yes admittedly, populist social democrat President.

Jeez, I swear the situation is way more complex than you guys give it credit for.

Also, why are there so many left communists as moderators on this board?

[Palingenisis]

Like CMoney said, I and probably others are not trying to mark this the Holy Grail of revolutionary movements in this era but that there should be support for the Venezuelan people in their attempt to protect what little they've created through a, yes admittedly, populist social democrat President.


Under the Chavez goverment there have been real material improvements for the working class there...Childern learning to read and write when as before they wouldnt have got the chance. These things are very important out in the real world to real people. If revolutionaires dismiss these things as unimportant we cut ourselves from the masses.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I can't help but notice that if Chavez succeeds, or Venezuela succeeds in implementing true socialism through the Top-Bottom ideal, then this is not just a threat to the imperialists, due to how well in arms & ready the working class & peasantry are, but will also be a threat to the anarchistic ideals as well, since their entire structured ideas are based on the idea that the State is naturally bad & will never lead us anywhere good, let alone Socialism. Anarchists are so up in arms when it comes to State issues, & they completely forget about science & the psychological state of environmental conditions that play into how things operate. It's always "natural" to them when it comes to State & political affairs & it's saddening. I could be wrong here, but I was once an Anarchist as well, & that's how I was brought about as one.

UPDATE: Also, to the article showing why the People's Militia is different to things like the U.S. Army, I just love this part: "In recent years Chávez has bought large quantities of these weapons from Russia. Washington and its hired media have made a tremendous fuss, alleging that these guns are destined for the FARC guerrillas in Colombia. Now everyone can see what they are really intended for." Now that's just a nice big slap to Washington's face! haha :)

[el_chavista]

They are at least converting the military reserve into a popular militia, as an irregular army in case of a situation where the national armed force might be surpassed by an enemy army.

The problem of the carrying of weapons is being discussed and there is a proposal for a mobile military park by Gen. Alberto Müller.

[danyboy27]

Difference is that, as they are trained enough, on demand they themselves can arrange for their food, logistics, money and weapon. If parties who are engaged in guerrilla war can do that even by standing against government and by people without any kind of training, then this militia can certainly do so and I hope so because they know where to find arms, logistics and food. Bourgeoisie and imperialist governments worldwide just create their army and train them is such a way, that they are nearly about totally aloof from their class base and common people of their country. But, as per the news, the persons engaged in this militia is taking part in it as a secondary occupation. Their primary occupation is either working in fields or in factories i.e. they will still remain in their own class and THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE IN MY OPINION.

Well we could say the same about Lybia militia, called the people militia.
and yet, i dont see them overthrowing the current dictatorship.

Much of the weekend soldier i encountered in my life where worker, and had a high degree of class consciousness.

the thing is, those guy are in the system, they got better salary than the avearge worker, and they know it, and they know from where this money come from.

[danyboy27]

They are at least converting the military reserve into a popular militia, as an irregular army in case of a situation where the national armed force might be surpassed by an enemy army.

The problem of the carrying of weapons is being discussed and there is a proposal for a mobile military park by Gen. Alberto Müller.

the name change, but their chain of command still pretty much the same.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Well we could say the same about Lybia militia, called the people militia.
and yet, i dont see them overthrowing the current dictatorship.

Much of the weekend soldier i encountered in my life where worker, and had a high degree of class consciousness.

the thing is, those guy are in the system, they got better salary than the avearge worker, and they know it, and they know from where this money come from.

These people in arms out there on the streets, they are there without a salary of holding those guns, of being ready to use those guns when the revolution begins. So to compare that to a group of working class that's being paid to fight for U.S. imperialism is absolute bullshit & completely illogical!

[pranabjyoti]

Well we could say the same about Lybia militia, called the people militia.
and yet, i dont see them overthrowing the current dictatorship.

Much of the weekend soldier i encountered in my life where worker, and had a high degree of class consciousness.

the thing is, those guy are in the system, they got better salary than the avearge worker, and they know it, and they know from where this money come from.
Actually, the Lybian militia will do, but perhaps they are confused by the actions of world police USA.:D

[danyboy27]

These people in arms out there on the streets, they are there without a salary of holding those guns, of being ready to use those guns when the revolution begins. So to compare that to a group of working class that's being paid to fight for U.S. imperialism is absolute bullshit & completely illogical!

do you have actual evidence that they dont receive any kind of money from the governement?

[The Vegan Marxist]

do you have actual evidence that they dont receive any kind of money from the governement?

are you kidding me? These people have other jobs right after this. All they did was gather up arms & made an oath that they'd be in the front lines protecting the socialist revolution taking place in Venezuela. After that, they go to their real jobs & get their wages from there.

[RedSonRising]

Can any of the critics of a lack of "direct worker-controlled" proletarian consent give an example of what they should think a revolutionary militia is supposed to look like? Because as far as I can tell these militias are not dependent on the state for their role as armed citizens, and seem conscious enough to realize whether or not a decision made by the state is going to violently harm their or their family's interests.

[The Douche]

I like how my point is continually ignored or misrepresented.

What I'm saying is, we don't know the real nature of this militia. I don't, and none of you jumping on this bandwagon do.

And I clearly stated that it could be a very positive thing or it could be something as meaningless (in the revolutionary sense) as the US national guard.

I'm just saying we don't know enough to make a judgement.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I like how my point is continually ignored or misrepresented.

What I'm saying is, we don't know the real nature of this militia. I don't, and none of you jumping on this bandwagon do.

And I clearly stated that it could be a very positive thing or it could be something as meaningless (in the revolutionary sense) as the US national guard.

I'm just saying we don't know enough to make a judgement.

Actually, we know what you're saying, as I took note of this when you first said it. Even RadioRaheem agreed with you to an extent on this very page. But, we don't see it as a lack of information as much as you do. We may not know many details on them, but we have enough to point out the main differences between the People's Militias & the U.S. National Guard.

[Robocommie]

I like how my point is continually ignored or misrepresented.

What I'm saying is, we don't know the real nature of this militia. I don't, and none of you jumping on this bandwagon do.

And I clearly stated that it could be a very positive thing or it could be something as meaningless (in the revolutionary sense) as the US national guard.

I'm just saying we don't know enough to make a judgement.

I personally feel we do know enough to at least be encouraged by these developments.

[The Douche]

Do we know how the weapons are possesed?

Do we know who commands the militia?

Do we know in what ways the militia are held accountable?

Do we know what relationship the militias have (as far as command structure) to the workers/peasants?


I don't see any clear answers to these questions. I see a lot of assumptions about them though.



We may not know many details on them, but we have enough to point out the main differences between the People's Militias & the U.S. National Guard.

Do you? Or is your support of Chavez obscuring your ability to think critically of this development?


Venezuela succeeds in implementing true socialism through the Top-Bottom ideal

This needs a thread of its own and needs to be discussed.

[black magick hustla]

there has been plenty of "rag-tag" armed groups subservient to the state. i dont think this proves anything. The interhamwe where all commoners ....

[The Vegan Marxist]

Do we know how the weapons are possesed?

If you read the Marxist article provided, the weapons came directly from Russia when Chavez brought thousands back from there. This ended up sparking a controversial claim that Chavez was helping supply FARC, which was a very well supported claim by those in the U.S.


Do we know who commands the militia?

No, not yet.


Do we know in what ways the militia are held accountable?

Please explain better, thank you.


Do we know what relationship the militias have (as far as command structure) to the workers/peasants?

http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5150 - please read.

[The Douche]

If you read the Marxist article provided, the weapons came directly from Russia when Chavez brought thousands back from there. This ended up sparking a controversial claim that Chavez was helping supply FARC, which was a very well supported claim by those in the U.S.


No, not how they were acquired. I mean, in what manner are they possessed? Do the individuals keep the weapons/ammo themselves? Or are they under the lock and key of the military/police at some central armory?


No, not yet.

Well I think thats pretty damn important in determining if this is a "workers militia" or an auxiliary to the army.


Please explain better, thank you.


Do they take orders/are they held accountable for their actions by the military/state/party? Or by the communities in which they live? Do they take orders from the military/state? Or from some sort of independent worker's council?


http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5150 (http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5150) - please read.

Yeah, uh, I've seen that a few times. It doesn't really answer what I'm asking. But I would say it is safe to assume that most of the people in the militia are peasants. That doesn't, however, talk about the way in which they are organized (again, is there a professional officer class leading them?) and what their actual relationship is to the communities they are going to protect. Who's command are they under? The state or the workers? I would also like to pull this quote:


Chavez explained that the peasant militias will form part of the Bolivarian Armed Forces, and “therefore, do not undermine it, nor are they intended to supplant it” and will be “absolutely regulated by the law,”

So they are a part of the army, and not seperate from it, they are not an arm of the working class, but of the state. (or as Chavez, and I'm sure you, would like to put it, they are in some way an arm of both) The militias are explicitly not intended to replace the army, so this is not really as much of a revolutionary development as some would like to paint it, we're not doing away with the military in favor of armed workers, we're arming workers and putting them under the command of the military (regulated by the law).

[Die Neue Zeit]

Well I think thats pretty damn important in determining if this is a "workers militia" or an auxiliary to the army.

I'm sure I said this recently, but I don't care if peasant militias or "popular militias" are anti-imperialist auxiliaries to the army. What should concern us is if worker militias are such auxiliaries.

[The Douche]

I'm sure I said this recently, but I don't care if peasant militias or "popular militias" are anti-imperialist auxiliaries to the army. What should concern us is if worker militias are such auxiliaries.

I have seen passing refrences to worker's militias in addition to the peasant militias in Venezuela, I would say its safe to assume both run the same way.

[pranabjyoti]

I have seen passing refrences to worker's militias in addition to the peasant militias in Venezuela, I would say its safe to assume both run the same way.
I support this idea too. That will be better but that doesn't mean "peasants militia" is bad, that is certainly a good forward step. Lets see whether any step will be taken in future to make a workers militia like the peasants militia. I hope some comrades here like El Chevista can contribute some information in this regard.

[The Douche]

I support this idea too. That will be better but that doesn't mean "peasants militia" is bad, that is certainly a good forward step. Lets see whether any step will be taken in future to make a workers militia like the peasants militia. I hope some comrades here like El Chevista can contribute some information in this regard.

First, they have organized workers into similar militas allready from what I understand.

Second, I don't think this is necessarily a positive development, because my current understanding is that these organizations are not tools of/expressions of the working class, they are auxiliaries for the state/military/party. And that is nothing special, nor do I consider it all that socialist.

[pranabjyoti]

First, they have organized workers into similar militas allready from what I understand.

Second, I don't think this is necessarily a positive development, because my current understanding is that these organizations are not tools of/expressions of the working class, they are auxiliaries for the state/military/party. And that is nothing special, nor do I consider it all that socialist.
Why do you all the time ignoring a very very "vital" point that no other "capitalist" country in this world want to take such risk. There is high possibility that when oppression to workers and peasants will be high, this militia will then certainly point its guns and other ammunition towards its own class enemy and at that moment, it will be very dangerous for the state itself. If they still remain in their own class, then there is a high chance they will act in favor of their own class.

[The Douche]

Why do you all the time ignoring a very very "vital" point that no other "capitalist" country in this world want to take such risk. There is high possibility that when oppression to workers and peasants will be high, this militia will then certainly point its guns and other ammunition towards its own class enemy and at that moment, it will be very dangerous for the state itself. If they still remain in their own class, then there is a high chance they will act in favor of their own class.

*sigh*


Why do you all the time ignoring a very very "vital" point that no other "capitalist" country in this world want to take such risk.

What risk? The risk of allowing workers to be assimilated into the mechanisms of the state? Pretty sure that occurs in every capitalist country, the militaries of all nations are filled with the working class.


There is high possibility that when oppression to workers and peasants will be high, this militia will then certainly point its guns and other ammunition towards its own class enemy and at that moment, it will be very dangerous for the state itself. If they still remain in their own class, then there is a high chance they will act in favor of their own class

So far all the evidence indicates that this militia is a just a part time auxiliary to the regular military, which means that they serve the interests of the state/military/party. Yes, these guys would be more likely to uphold class interests than the regular military, but ultimately these militias are not just the "armed working class" which is what we should support, they are the working class under the command of the military.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The reason why I have concerns is, as cmoney implied, worker militias being auxiliaries goes against the idea of class independence for Venezuelan workers. That independence also includes independence from the very petit-bourgeois Bolivarianism.

[pranabjyoti]

What risk? The risk of allowing workers to be assimilated into the mechanisms of the state? Pretty sure that occurs in every capitalist country, the militaries of all nations are filled with the working class.
Firstly, military are NOT workers. As for example, if a factory worker was born in a peasant family, then which class he/she belongs to. If an industrialist was born in a peasant or worker family, which class he/she belongs too. Military in itself is a class, when one is admitted in it, his/her previous class source is irrelevant than. Those persons in the militia are organized without leaving their class and they still have their class identity. To me whether it's a part of a state or not is not a matter of concern, the real matter of concern is whether they will serve their class or not and in my opinion, there is a high chance of it.

So far all the evidence indicates that this militia is a just a part time auxiliary to the regular military, which means that they serve the interests of the state/military/party. Yes, these guys would be more likely to uphold class interests than the regular military, but ultimately these militias are not just the "armed working class" which is what we should support, they are the working class under the command of the military.
If this militia isn't "armed working class", then what the hell is it?

[The Douche]

Firstly, military are NOT workers. As for example, if a factory worker was born in a peasant family, then which class he/she belongs to. If an industrialist was born in a peasant or worker family, which class he/she belongs too. Military in itself is a class, when one is admitted in it, his/her previous class source is irrelevant than. Those persons in the militia are organized without leaving their class and they still have their class identity. To me whether it's a part of a state or not is not a matter of concern, the real matter of concern is whether they will serve their class or not and in my opinion, there is a high chance of it.

There are a thousand threads where this arguement is gone over and beaten to death, and it is the reason that I often consider leaving this site.


If this militia isn't "armed working class", then what the hell is it?

As I said in the portion of the post which you quoted:


they are the working class under the command of the military

As a member of the US national guard, I am still a worker because I hold a service industry job, and I am also a student at a college. Does this mean I'm in a workers militia?:lol:

These militias are under the command of the military and the state, not the workers themselves. So no, it is not "the armed working class" it is workers under command of the military.

[RadioRaheem84]

There are a thousand threads where this arguement is gone over and beaten to death, and it is the reason that I often consider leaving this site.

You're considering leaving the site because of an argument over the nature of the Bolivarian Revolution?

I am sorry but this isn't the litmus test of who is really a comrade or not. We can have our disagreements because the Venezuelan situation is very complex and is riddled with contradictions but why are you insisting that the nature and scope of the revolution is utterly misguided?

[The Douche]

You're considering leaving the site because of an argument over the nature of the Bolivarian Revolution?

I am sorry but this isn't the litmus test of who is really a comrade or not. We can have our disagreements because the Venezuelan situation is very complex and is riddled with contradictions but why are you insisting that the nature and scope of the revolution is utterly misguided?

No dude. Look at the portion I quoted, he's talking about the military. And that is a discussion I am sick of.

I am highly critical of the bolivarian revolution because it seems to me that it is not rooted in the working class, but in certain individuals. And then people come out and say things like this:


Venezuela succeeds in implementing true socialism through the Top-Bottom ideal

There is no such thing as socialism from above...I believe, as Marx did:


That the emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves

I think there are positive developments there, but really, people are being to uncritical and are just riding Chavez's nuts most of the time.

[The Vegan Marxist]

There is no such thing as socialism from above...I believe, as Marx did:

It was also very different back then as well. I think it's possible to have Socialism from above, it'll just be a slower & much harder process.

[pranabjyoti]

No dude. Look at the portion I quoted, he's talking about the military. And that is a discussion I am sick of.

I am highly critical of the bolivarian revolution because it seems to me that it is not rooted in the working class, but in certain individuals. And then people come out and say things like this:



There is no such thing as socialism from above...I believe, as Marx did:



I think there are positive developments there, but really, people are being to uncritical and are just riding Chavez's nuts most of the time.
Actually, you don't have the basic idea that without some kind of class support, INDIVIDUALS ARE NOTHING. If Bolivarian revolution is centered around some INDIVIDUALS, as you have said, then it is certain that they have support of peasants and workers behind them and AT PRESENT THEY ARE THE BEST REPRESENTATIVE OF THEIR CLASS INTEREST.

[Ligeia]

These militias are under the command of the military and the state, not the workers themselves. So no, it is not "the armed working class" it is workers under command of the military.
Reading throug venzuelan media....that's true but that doesn't mean people in those militias don't know what's in their interests.
Quite the opposite, I've encountered comments and the like which point to a differentiation in matters of the state and the military.
People take notice of reformists and bureaucrats in the state and hostile components of the military and the police and oppose them/know what they are all about (even if they are their very own militia instructors).

And it's also not like there are no efforts made to instruct people in the meaning of socialism, capitalism, burgeoisie, ...etc. If you browse through the venezuelan media you'll find enough stuff about this topics broadcast and published everywhere. Also in other groups (e.g Frentes) you'll find wrítings about this as instruction.
When it comes to councils, it's advised that members of a council should ingress in the militias. So as to have the militias work together with the councils.
Then again, that's not to say that all people in ingressing in the militias are conscious of socialism or anything like that even there you can find people who don't care at all.

I've read the weapons aren't kept by the militias but by their training camps. (And there exist complaints about that). They are trained by professionals, even Cuban instructors can chime in sometimes....

Concluding, they are under the command of the state/army but they know how to differentiate between reformists,capitalists,corruption,...etc.etc. in those ranks.

[The Douche]

It was also very different back then as well. I think it's possible to have Socialism from above, it'll just be a slower & much harder process.

This why I said it needed its own thread. This very idea is not only "non-marxist", its actually opposed to marxism. Its inherently authoritarian, and even the most stalwart of stalinists would acknowledge that socialism, and communism, must be built by the workers, not by some beauracrats. If you think socialism can be constructed by one man who gets enough power then you'll probably be a national bolshevik in a few months.


Actually, you don't have the basic idea that without some kind of class support, INDIVIDUALS ARE NOTHING. If Bolivarian revolution is centered around some INDIVIDUALS, as you have said, then it is certain that they have support of peasants and workers behind them and AT PRESENT THEY ARE THE BEST REPRESENTATIVE OF THEIR CLASS INTEREST.

Putting things in ALL CAPS doesn't makes them FACTS.

Workers and peasants supported fascist Peron as well, and the nazis were voted into the chancelorship...woopidy dooo. The fact is, socialism must be built by the masses, not for them by a beauracratic state. You can't establish socialism from above, and it contines to appear that the bolivarian state is subverting tools for working class organization by assimilating them into the state. If Chavez wanted workers power, then why are the militias not under the control of the workers directly? Could it be that the power of the organized working class threatens the power of the Bolivarian state/PSUV?


Reading throug venzuelan media....that's true but that doesn't mean people in those militias don't know what's in their interests.
Quite the opposite, I've encountered comments and the like which point to a differentiation in matters of the state and the military.
People take notice of reformists and bureaucrats in the state and hostile components of the military and the police and oppose them/know what they are all about (even if they are their very own militia instructors).

And it's also not like there are no efforts made to instruct people in the meaning of socialism, capitalism, burgeoisie, ...etc. If you browse through the venezuelan media you'll find enough stuff about this topics broadcast and published everywhere. Also in other groups (e.g Frentes) you'll find wrítings about this as instruction.
When it comes to councils, it's advised that members of a council should ingress in the militias. So as to have the militias work together with the councils.
Then again, that's not to say that all people in ingressing in the militias are conscious of socialism or anything like that even there you can find people who don't care at all.

I've read the weapons aren't kept by the militias but by their training camps. (And there exist complaints about that). They are trained by professionals, even Cuban instructors can chime in sometimes....

Concluding, they are under the command of the state/army but they know how to differentiate between reformists,capitalists,corruption,...etc.etc. in those ranks.

Unfortunately I can't read venezuelan media because I am only an english speaker. But again, we are confirming here that these institutions are organs of the state, not independent working class organizations. These groups are formed by, led by, equipped by, and answer to the state.





Again, I think people who support Chavez do so without critique, and that is dangerous. I would like socialism to succeed just as much as all of the other posters on this board, but I'm not going to ignore the reality of the situation to make it seem better than it is.

[Ligeia]

The situation isn't black or white.
Just because it's under the state's command doesn't mean everybody thinks that the state's always correct in its actions(really, not at all) and thus will answer to everything a statesman commands(governors,military,police..etc.).
And just because it's the Bolivarian militia doesn't mean everybody in this militias is a conscious revolutionary either(even opposition-people can enter the militia).
People aren't mindless drones.

E.g.It seems that the FANB (military) isn't happy with the creation of militias and thus it can happen that instructors don't do their job well purposefully.Conscious people in the militias know this and don't trust the military all the way.

Section out of an article about the militia by independent Frente Nacional Campesino Ezequiel Zamora (http://www.fncez.net.ve/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=144:la-milicia-nacional-bolivariana&catid=59:comunicados&Itemid=81):

In the conformation of Milicia Nacional Bolivariana (MNB) these differences and contradictions between the revolutionary sectors and the reformist sectors begin to appear not only in theoretical matters but also in practice. Mainly in the FANB there is much resistance to the MNB for being an instrument of the armed people. These preservative sectors bid up to maintain the process of conformation of the militias under iron control.They fear to lose this that all bourgeois military man hoards and has like his main order: the monopoly of arms. We remember that the school where our officials educated themselves is the school of the bourgeoise State where the military man plays a concrete role in the domination model that sustains the State: to exclusively administer violence to maintain the people under control.Specifically our FANB was formed under the doctrine of security of Yankee imperialism and this is even very present in those in the FANB who call themselves Chavistas and Bolivarianos. But not only in sectors of the FANB exist practices that restrain the revolutionary character that the MNB must achieve. In ministries and the rest of the State there is a bureaucratic vision that is expressed in thinking that for the conformation of this it is enough to enlist civil servants of X ministry and take them to the instructions, to uniform them and to put them to march past in front of the Commandante Presidente.The situation is much more complex and it's already been stated here.
Without having too much information on this topic it should also be difficult to argue about realities (for everybody).

[The Douche]

Just because it's under the state's command doesn't mean everybody thinks that the state's always correct in its actions(really, not at all) and thus will answer to everything a statesman commands(governors,military,police..etc.).


Of course. But as an organ of the state, it is reasonable to assume that it will do the bidding of the state. Though if the state were to order it to take actions which were anti-working class, yes I think that there would be higher rates of refusal than in the regular army. I am sure, however, that the orders would largely be carried out, because the people joining know that they are joining an institution which serves the state.


It seems that the FANB (military) isn't happy with the creation of militias and thus it can happen that instructors don't do their job well purposefully.Conscious people in the militias know this and don't trust the military all the way.

Who provides the tactical leadership? Are the officers part of the military, or selected from within the militia? Are the militias made in anyway accountable to the workers? Do workers councils get a say in how the militias will be deployed/trained/led?


In ministries and the rest of the State there is a bureaucratic vision that is expressed in thinking that for the conformation of this it is enough to enlist civil servants of X ministry and take them to the instructions, to uniform them and to put them to march past in front of the Commandante Presidente.

This...this right here. This, I think is saying something similar to my critiscism, in that, these aren't really organs of working class power, they're organs of state power, but made to look like the "organized working class".


Without having too much information on this topic it should also be difficult to argue about realities (for everybody).

I have said this from the start of the discussion. I think we always have to look at things critically, not just jump up and down for joy when Chavez does something.

[Die Neue Zeit]

This why I said it needed its own thread. This very idea is not only "non-marxist", its actually opposed to marxism. Its inherently authoritarian, and even the most stalwart of stalinists would acknowledge that socialism, and communism, must be built by the workers, not by some beauracrats.

You might want to look up Bordigism, a form of Marxian socialism from above.

[The Douche]

You might want to look up Bordigism, a form of Marxian socialism from above.

I am plenty familiar with Bordiga's "dictatorship of the party". Its anti-marxist.

[the last donut of the night]

It was also very different back then as well. I think it's possible to have Socialism from above, it'll just be a slower & much harder process.

Whoa whoa, I support the Bolivarian movement (not a revolution yet) but I'll be damned if I brainwash myself into believing Chavez is implementing socialism. These are reforms. There will be a point -- hopefully -- when the workers finally see that these reforms will not stop capitalism or change it, take up arms, and finally overthrow the capitalist order. Whether Chavez will support that, we don't know. But these are reforms, which are helping workers and may be the death sentence of Venezuelan capitalists in the end.

[gorillafuck]

If the weapons are kept in the workers/peasants homes, then this is very good because it gives them the means to fight back against the thugs of the big landowners and capitalists. That, to me, seems like a positive thing regardless of your opinion on the current Venezuelan government (which I am undecided on). If they are kept in armories to be accessed when it is commanded by Chavez or some state official, this is meaningless.

[What Would Durruti Do?]

So when should I pencil in "revolution" on my schedule? Say, next week?

[the last donut of the night]

So when should I pencil in "revolution" on my schedule? Say, next week?


lolz anarkism makes me liek so funnyyy

[What Would Durruti Do?]

lolz anarkism makes me liek so funnyyy

I was being totally serious. The working class in Venezuela now apparently has an army. What's stopping it from overthrowing the bourgeoisie and capitalism?

[Bright Banana Beard]

I was being totally serious. The working class in Venezuela now apparently has an army. What's stopping it from overthrowing the bourgeoisie and capitalism?
It will fail, you need to have a large base like Brazil, Colombia, and Argentina to do that.

Learn the lesson from Nicaragua, El Salvador, Haiti, Grenada, etc.

The USA will decimate the whole Venezuela if necessary.

[Ligeia]

Who provides the tactical leadership? Are the officers part of the military, or selected from within the militia? Are the militias made in anyway accountable to the workers? Do workers councils get a say in how the militias will be deployed/trained/led?
Tactical leadership....the instructors are officers which are part of the reservists, the reservists are part of the militia. Militia officers are also being formed in the UNEFA (university linked to the military with own militia).
It's also been tried to establish militias according to communes(milicia territorial) or in the case of workers, according to their workplaces(cuerpos combatientes).More than that I do not know.
At the moment there are various changes taking place in the militias.

When it comes to carrying weapons, el chavista has already commented on this:


The problem of the carrying of weapons is being discussed and there is a proposal for a mobile military park by Gen. Alberto Müller.



This, I think is saying something similar to my critiscism, in that, these aren't really organs of working class power, they're organs of state power, but made to look like the "organized working class".
You are looking from an outsiders point of view which is the difference here.
This criticism is directed towards bureaucrats and the military who want to keep it at a level where it can't be a true militia which is a criticism that also arises within the militias.This article encourages people to join the militia despite of this danger since there might be at least a little of usefulness gained from it for revolutionary purposes.
These seem to be pretty independent thoughts (and not state-servile ones). This is not to say everybody thinks like that.


Whoa whoa, I support the Bolivarian movement (not a revolution yet) but I'll be damned if I brainwash myself into believing Chavez is implementing socialism. These are reforms. There will be a point -- hopefully -- when the workers finally see that these reforms will not stop capitalism or change it, take up arms, and finally overthrow the capitalist order. Whether Chavez will support that, we don't know. But these are reforms, which are helping workers and may be the death sentence of Venezuelan capitalists in the end.

I think Chavez himselfs believes that you can't implement socialism from above....he recently said that if he's being murdered people should fight against the bourgeoisie and take control over all establishments.
Some months before this he said he would lead a violent revolution against the bourgeoise in a hostile situation,...so it seems he acknowledges that decisive steps to socialism can't be taken with a bourgeoisie state full of bureaucrats and the like which impede significant action.
Even in this reformist situation Venezuela is already having regular problems with sabotage, invasion and hindrance (from within governmental elements and also from the outside).

[The Douche]

Tactical leadership....the instructors are officers which are part of the reservists, the reservists are part of the militia. Militia officers are also being formed in the UNEFA (university linked to the military with own militia).
It's also been tried to establish militias according to communes(milicia territorial) or in the case of workers, according to their workplaces(cuerpos combatientes).More than that I do not know.
At the moment there are various changes taking place in the militias.

So they are trained and led by professional soldiers.


You are looking from an outsiders point of view which is the difference here.
This criticism is directed towards bureaucrats and the military who want to keep it at a level where it can't be a true militia which is a criticism that also arises within the militias.This article encourages people to join the militia despite of this danger since there might be at least a little of usefulness gained from it for revolutionary purposes.
These seem to be pretty independent thoughts (and not state-servile ones). This is not to say everybody thinks like that.

Well I think we should subvert the armies of all imperialist nations, but I would never agitate for workers to join them in order to do so. These militias are not organs of the working class, they're tools of the state, the information we do have has made that clear.

[Kléber]

How could any left wing minded person not be happy that the nationalist regime has been shored up against another pro-imperialist coup attempt?

At the same time, how can communists be so quick to attack someone who just asked good questions about who is in charge of the command structure, independent workers and peasants organizations or the state military apparatus?


It will fail, you need to have a large base like Brazil, Colombia, and Argentina to do that.

Learn the lesson from Nicaragua, El Salvador, Haiti, Grenada, etc.

The USA will decimate the whole Venezuela if necessary.

Really? Haitian Revolution was a mistake? And Russian workers should have followed Menshevik advice (as Stalin and Kamenev wanted) and not expropriated capitalists until Western Europe had done so?

[the last donut of the night]

I was being totally serious. The working class in Venezuela now apparently has an army. What's stopping it from overthrowing the bourgeoisie and capitalism?

Oh, sorry, comrade. :blushing:

[Bright Banana Beard]

Really? Haitian Revolution was a mistake? And Russian workers should have followed Menshevik advice (as Stalin and Kamenev wanted) and not expropriated capitalists until Western Europe had done so?
Where did I say that I opposed any revolution? I am referring to the 2004 Haitian invasion. Comparing it to a revolution that happened a century ago is a joke. We are in different epoch that Marxism has many more problems and theories than a century ago. Without the strong leaderships and strong disciplines, the revolution will either fail or degenerate.