Revolutionary Situation in Venezuela [Archive]

View Full Version : Revolutionary Situation in Venezuela

Kez

18th May 2004, 17:53

Aright,

The Revolutionary situation in Venezuela is getting deeper by the day, and it is our duty to know what is going on in the workers struggle against Reaction and Capitalism in Venezuela, and more importantly to spread this to the wider Labour movement internationally.

Basics on the beginning:
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venezuela_eyewitness0103.html
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venezuelan_...nists_shot.html (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venezuelan_trade_unionists_shot.html)
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venez_year_after.html
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/ven_econ_sabotage.html

Recent News:
http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org
http://www.marxist.com/venezuela.asp
http://www.vheadline.com/
http://www.aporrea.org/
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/

I think it is important to recognise that for to long we have seen Revolution as a theoretical possibility, or a historical thing, or something we only dream of, but this is it, for most of us, really the first time in our lives where we see a class struggle on a national and international basis.

If anyone has any more links pass them on, and i will edit this post, if there is any news from any site post it up for discussion and so we can see what is going on.

No to US intervention in Venezuela!
Defend the Venezuelan revolution!
Forward to Socialism!

fernando

18th May 2004, 18:31

Same reaction as what I posted in the "Cuba after Castro Thread" I'll gladly join to protect it against an invasion of the Imperialists, I believe in one United Latin America who rules themselves, not ruled by the US or EU or anyone else!

Hopefully if this Revolution is succesfull it will spread throughout Latin America, kicking the Americans out of our lands!

VIVA LA REVOLUCION!!!

PATRIA O MUERTE!!!

Comrade Latino

18th May 2004, 22:52

Hopefully if this Revolution is succesfull it will spread throughout Latin America, kicking the Americans out of our lands!
Lets hope that happens.

Dr. Rosenpenis

18th May 2004, 23:21

Good stuff, comrade.
I had no idea the whole thing was this intense and potentially revolutionary.
We need to somehow show support for these folks in Venezuela.

Should this be sticked?

Comrade Latino

18th May 2004, 23:31

Should this be sticked?
Yes, that is a great idea!

Judas Trotskariot

18th May 2004, 23:36

I enjoy the Bolivarian circles so much that I almost faint with ecstasy. Damn, why doesn't Chavez hurry it the fuck up????

fuerzasocialista

19th May 2004, 00:43

All in do time.....

Louis Pio

19th May 2004, 00:48

The point is Chavez is still balancing between deepening the revolution or halting it.
But it seems he is moving rapidly to the left.
If we don't boot out the reactionaries and arm the people it will end in reaction, like it happened in Chile. Luckily it seems to be going in the right direction and fortunate for us the USA have their hands full in Iraq.

Agent provocateur

19th May 2004, 01:11

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 12:48 AM
The point is Chavez is still balancing between deepening the revolution or halting it.
But it seems he is moving rapidly to the left.
If we don't boot out the reactionaries and arm the people it will end in reaction, like it happened in Chile. Luckily it seems to be going in the right direction and fortunate for us the USA have their hands full in Iraq.
Chavez confuses me sometimes but I support the Bolivarian revolution because I enjoy seeing the people at work. Did you all see the documentary The Revolution Will Not Be Televised? Did you all witness the lies that the reactionary class spewed forth to sully the revolution? What lies! What infamy! And those who propose to vote for John Fucking Kerry should know what his ketchup-menstruating-heiress wife said about President Hugo Chavez. She said,"Chavez is a problem."

http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_review.../10/103101.html (http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/2003/10/103101.html)

fernando

19th May 2004, 07:32

That is the thing about Kerry Im worried about, I mean Bush might stay in Iraq and start more stuff there, while Kerry would do less in Iraq and probably focus more on stuff like Chavez, trying to keep the "US backyard" going.

Edward Penishands

20th May 2004, 01:41

I really think this Venezuela revolution is going to accelerate speedily in the next few months with Cuban fingerprints all over it--- thank God.

Louis Pio

20th May 2004, 01:44

Well some cubans want to halt it. Luckily big parts of the communist party of cuba want it to go further. So Cuban interference isn't neccesarily a good thing, it depends on who it is.

fuerzasocialista

21st May 2004, 03:56

A couple of weeks back, I was reading a spanish newspaper here called "El Diario" and there was an article in it stating how the extremists in Miami were starting to train opposing para-military personnel from Venezuela in an attempts to take out Chavez. President Chavez is too smart for those muthas. I wouldn't be surprised if he was sitting on a beach in Venezuela looking towards Miami with the middle finger pointing high saying "Bring it on biatch, I'm ready" :angry:

Bolshevist

21st May 2004, 14:44

I hope some socialistic countries will provide military support. As history has already showed us, this cannot proceed without some kind of western/capitalistic intervention. Oh, how great it would be to see the Latin-American countries start to develop socialism and communism. :D

Kez

21st May 2004, 16:18

Well, i dunno about Chavez being on a beach, hes been working hard (being forced to).

Hes training villagers and workers in fighting training by the army. I guess these will become workers militias when the coup comes.

But we must see this as a very positive step, in how Chavez is openly preparing against a reactionary movement, in that he has no false hopes of "peace" or "partnership" with these motherfuckers.

Add to this the increasing anti-capitalist nature of Chavez, and we see how things are moving forward.

Not to say Chavez is perfect, but something to defend against the oncoming imperialist onslaught.

Kez

21st May 2004, 17:16

- The targets are Venezuela and Cuba - New Intrigues of US imperialism
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/targets_venezuela_cuba.html

A diplomatic crisis has opened up between Mexico and Cuba. Mexico's
Vicente Fox government has demanded the recall of the Mexican ambassador
from Havana and ordered the Cuban diplomats to leave. The response of the
masses was anything but favourable. Thousands demonstrated in Mexico,
while a million marched through Havana. This has deepened the political
crisis in Mexico and further undermined Fox and his right wing PAN
government. By Alan Woods in Mexico City, (May 21, 2004)

Kez

21st May 2004, 17:19

Heres proof of how US imperialismism is preparing for a military coup

Id advise anyone throwing a meeting to use this as material, and show the US's imperialist role, and connect it to historical events including Iraq
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/columbian_p...s_arrested.html (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/columbian_paramilitaries_arrested.html)

Talking of which, how many people could have a "Hands Off Venezuela" meeting? The more the better, this can help people learn more about the topic, and also win more people over to the struggle

Time for real activity, not just talk! PM me, or leave a post here if your interested and i'll PM you.

Louis Pio

22nd May 2004, 00:30

This situation can go so much further, we all have to realise this.
Alan Woods have made some theses on the revolution, im linking to part one here. Everybody should read this, even if they think that Alan are " a stupid trot" (to use the same chilidsh language as some comrades on this board)
Theses on revolution and counterrevolution in Venezuela - Part One (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/theses__revolution_venezuela.html)
Anyway this situation is so serious that in my oppinion every militant classfighter should take a look at what's happening.

Louis Pio

25th May 2004, 00:00

And part 2 http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/theses_revo...venezuela2.html (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/theses_revolution_venezuela2.html)
Anyway disregard my "sour" comments in the last post, i've been quite annoyed with everything lately <_<

refuse_resist

26th May 2004, 22:05

The U.$. Imperialist better keep out of Latin America for their sake.

Severian

27th May 2004, 14:58

In addition to the Colombian "paramilitaries" caught training in Venezuela for an attempted coup, the Colombian army's been conducting a threatening buildup along the Venezuelan border. That's another threat to watch.

Yeah, Chavez proposes to build up the armed forces and more importantly to form a new militia. The government's organizing a literacy program, the land reform's moving forwards - slowly - and the state oil company is now carrying out public works and infrastructure projects throughout the country.

Cuba's role in all this is important - as the reactionaries recognize in a distorted way. Cuban doctors, literacy teachers, etc have brought the example of their revolution into Venezuela where everyone can see it, and increasing numbers of Venezuelans are considering the need for the revolution to move against capitalism in order to be successful.

That isn't its current program, and I think it's necessary to be clear on that. Chavez is supported by a section of the capitalist class, and recently sent in the National Guard against a Chavista-led steelworkers' strike. The union there is now demanding the nationalization of the company....

fuerzasocialista

28th May 2004, 18:38

From my understanding, those mafiosos extremists in Miami are funding those assholes so they could pull off that coup. Chavez has just got to sit tight like he's doing now and keep his friends close and enemies closer....

Kez

29th May 2004, 12:10

Ah, let us see what our great "liberal" "progressive" "open minded" journalists at the guardian have to say about the Revolution...

http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/reply_guardian.html

Sabocat

30th May 2004, 13:06

Here's another good article regarding the capture of the paramilitaries.

New people's army, land to poor
By Berta Joubert-Ceci

It was a wake-up call. On May 9 Venezuelan forces surprised 150 Colombian paramilitaries who had been hired to assassinate President Hugo Chávez. They were apprehended on the farm of opposition leader Robert Alonso, architect of the "guarimbas"--violent street blockades staged by supporters of the Venezuelan oligarchy. Alonso is a counter-revolutionary who comes originally from Cuba.

It was a reminder that U.S. imperialism, joined with the Colombian and Venezuelan oligarchies, has not ceased to conspire to oust President Chávez from office--both in the open, through a failing recall referendum, and in secret, as this incident reveals.

The leaders of this paramilitary grouping are also leaders of the vicious Autonomous Self-Defense Forces of Colombia. To date 130 Colombian paramilitary forces have been arrested in this operation. Their plan to kill Chávez has been brought to light through extensive interrogation.

They were to kill and decapitate the Venezuelan president. Then they planned to send his head to Cuban President Fidel Castro. As part of the assassination/coup process they would fire on Miraflores, the presidential palace, creating chaos in Venezuela.

Only the vigilance of the Venezuelan police and National Armed Forces (FAN) prevented the counter-revolutionary plot from reaching its goal. But with so much at stake and given the relentless quest of the bourgeoisie to regain its previous power, the police and the FAN are not enough.

Beginning early in the morning on May 16, one week after the plot was brought to light and the paramilitary troops arrested, thousands of people poured onto the broad Bolivar Avenue in Caracas to participate in a March for Peace and Sovereignty and Against Paramilitarism and Terrorism. They were eager to hear Chávez himself address them.

Read the rest.... http://www.workers.org/ww/2004/venez0603.php

acg4_9

30th May 2004, 21:23

latin america was always a place that spreads revolutionary thoughts and social ideas but it faces the same thing that we arabs face which is bad goverments, yes most of latin americans love chavez but there is this minority with it's big resources and the U.S cover they have the great control, and chavez as castro is a pain in there back so i am not surprised if they managed to get rid of chavez and his revolution cause what supports him are the working class and the working class unfortunatly support him like they support cendrella when she lost her shoe just sit and cheer or cry.
in 50 years the capatlists killed the arabic dream due to our carelessness and dreamy thinking and they returned us 200 years. i think now specially after this oil price crisis the the 21 century latin dream will soon be broken unless you learned from the other nations mistake and became practicaly positive. words must be changed to work and tongues must be changed to guns.

viva la resistance
viva iraq viva palestine

Kez

2nd June 2004, 18:17

I know manyof us are busy with work and school, but there is a revolution going on, and if we are to call ourselves socialists, and revolutionaries and so on, we must really do something to prove it. Here is an opportunity, i appeal to EVERYONE to do something about the reactionary workings in Venezuela, and help raise awareness of the Opposition groups reactionary tactics and ideology, and help deepen the revolution in Venezuela, thank you comrades.

If you need documents for flyers and petitions please PM or email me and i can email them to you or through post.

AN URGENT APPEAL!

Dear brothers and sisters,

The revolutionary process which is taking place in Venezuela is again under strong pressure from the reactionary opposition and imperialism. In December the opposition collected signatures in order to force a recall referendum. This is a democratic tool which was included in the new Bolivarian constitution which was discussed and approved in a referendum in 1999. The opposition claimed to have collected 3.6 million signatures (well over the 2.4 million needed). But when it came to deliver them to the National Electoral Commission, after much delay, they could only hand in 3.4 million. Of these, the National Electoral Commission, after careful scrutiny declared that some 800,000 of these were not valid (ID numbers did not coincide with names, and corresponded to people who were dead, or under-age, etc). Another 700,000 were declared doubtful and were sent to a re-verification process in which citizens would have the right to ratify or deny whether they had signed. When this decision was announced, and accepted by Organisation of American States and Carter Centre observers, the opposition refused to accept it and organised street riots and road blockades, using Molotov cocktails and assault rifles. When their terrorist tactics failed, they then recognised the decision and decided to participate in the re-verification process.

This took place at the weekend on May 28th to 30th. The process was fraught with irregularities. Large numbers of forged ID cards were found by the police at different locations. A computer, scanner, printer, repair forms, and forged IDs were found at the local headquarters of the opposition party Accion Democratica in El Valle, Caracas, where people who were being pursued by authorities sought refuge, and 600 ID cards were also found in the Accion Democratica headquarters in the Caracas district of El Paraiso. In these police raids they also found leaflets inciting violence and calling for a repeat of the riots that took place in February (a full account of irregularities can be found in this excellent article by Gregory Wilpert and Martin Sanchez (http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1284). There were also instances of workers sacked by their bosses for refusing to re-verify their signatures, as was the case at the Coca-Cola plant in Antimano, where 50 workers were threatened with the closure of the plant. The Venezuelan Coca-Cola subsidiary is owned by media magnate and opposition leader Gustavo Cisneros.

In the run up to the re-verification process, there was intense pressure from the US administration and the international media on the Venezuelan government. It was made clear that Chavez had to allow a referendum to take place, and that if there was no referendum this was because of his interference, and therefore the “international community” would take decisive action against the Chavez government (diplomatic pressure, economic blockade, OAS Democratic Charter intervention, etc). The implication is clear: “never mind about the signatures, call a referendum or we will blockade and eventually invade Venezuela”. So much for democracy!

The pressure has now been stepped up on the government and the National Electoral Council to deliver a decision giving the go ahead to a recall referendum. We must oppose this will all our forces. A recall referendum would most likely give a result in favour of president Hugo Chavez, but that is not the point. The point is that too many concessions have already been made to this anti-democratic opposition. The leaders of the opposition should not be collecting signatures for a recall referendum, they should be on trial and in jail for their part in the military coup of April 2002, the oil coup of December 2002 and the February 2004 riots.

There are those within the Bolivarian movement who argue that a referendum should be called because the opposition would lose it. But this is wrong. In the past, any concessions that have been made to the opposition have been used by the reactionaries to prepare new anti-democratic actions against the democratic will of the majority. At the same time the masses who support and participate in the Bolivarian movement are growing angrier at the fact that no serious action has been taken against the leaders of the opposition. They feel that the opposition leaders should pay for their crimes. We should not forget that in Nicaragua, years of military and economic sabotage had the effect of wearing out the revolutionary spirit of the masses and resulted in an electoral defeat of the Sandinistas, in an election with massive foreign imperialist intervention. At the end of the day, the main point is, if they haven’t collected the necessary signatures, they cannot have a recall referendum.

The only way to defend the revolutionary process is to deepen it and take it forward. We must reject any imperialist intervention in Venezuela with all our forces. At a moment when the revolution and its leaders are under extreme pressure from capitalist and imperialist “public opinion”, we must counter act this with labour movement and progressive public opinion from all over the world.

We ask all Hands Off Venezuela supporters, trade union and left wing activists to sign this statement and also to mobilise support for the Bolivarian revolution and to oppose imperialist intervention.

Hands off Venezuela Campaign
www.handsoffvenezuela.org
[email protected]

Comrade Mathew

2nd June 2004, 19:44

i cant help you guys any in defending there
1. i am just 16....
2. i am from germany

but believe me there will be no german intervention OR support of any US actions in latin or south america!!!! che is like in some european countries still a hero and even the biggest critics of cuba and not as bad as the average american.

If our government tollerates any imperialistic intervention we will tear the walls or our government down by hand if we have to!!! thats a promise!

fernando

2nd June 2004, 19:49

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 2 2004, 07:44 PM
i cant help you guys any in defending there
1. i am just 16....
2. i am from germany

but believe me there will be no german intervention OR support of any US actions in latin or south america!!!! che is like in some european countries still a hero and even the biggest critics of cuba and not as bad as the average american.

If our government tollerates any imperialistic intervention we will tear the walls or our government down by hand if we have to!!! thats a promise!
you can do something, spread the message, study hard..ok that sounded geeky, but it's true, a good education can be a powerfull weapon in the revolution..knowlege is power.

And that you are from Germany is a good thing, there are more left wing people and movements there than for example holland. I was in Germany for one week, and I never seen so many left wing/punkers/goths/alternative people in every day life.

Severian

2nd June 2004, 20:11

Considering that:

Germany leads the NATO contingent supporting Washington's colonial rule of Afghanistan,

Germany, and the EU generally, have joined in pressuring Cuba

Germany's ally France has joined in the U.S. invasion and occupation of Haiti

EU "election observers" are among those pressuring Venezuela to hold a referendum

I wouldn't be so sure that "there will be no german intervention OR support of any US actions in latin or south america!!!!"...seems to be there already is, in a EU good cop to US bad cop or EU carrot to US stick kind of way.

fernando

2nd June 2004, 20:15

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2004, 08:11 PM
Considering that:

Germany leads the NATO contingent supporting Washington's colonial rule of Afghanistan,

Germany, and the EU generally, have joined in pressuring Cuba

Germany's ally France has joined in the U.S. invasion and occupation of Haiti

EU "election observers" are among those pressuring Venezuela to hold a referendum

I wouldn't be so sure that "there will be no german intervention OR support of any US actions in latin or south america!!!!"...seems to be there already is, in a EU good cop to US bad cop or EU carrot to US stick kind of way.
Yes, the German government does these things...but it's not governments who start revolutions, it;s the people...we will start the revolution, not some german government.

Of course they are against Cuba, and against Venezuela turning socialist, Germany is an ally of the US and also an Imperialist nation, we should not forget that. We might point our fingers to the US, but Europe is just as bad, only they point their finger to the US too, so it looks like the US is the big bad wolf on it's own.

Kez

2nd June 2004, 20:20

Here is a German Article on the new trade unions in Venezuela and how they are against the old trade unions who betrayed the workers and fought against Chavez

http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/articles/unt.html

In Italy where "Hands Off Venezuela" had a tour of speakers, they managed to get major breakthroughs in Italian workers support for the workers trade unions and raised lots of money.
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/it_metalwor...upport_unt.html (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/it_metalworkers_lmby_support_unt.html)

It also highlighted the Italian workers own plight against the beurocracy in their uunions and against Capitalism too.

This is why we should use the Venezuelan situation as a focus point for organisation and discussion, to help the Venezuelan revolution, and also our own revolution at home.

Also comradee Mathew, look:
http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/articles/cologne.html
so my apologies, things had already started in Germany for Hands Off Venezuela.

fuerzasocialista

2nd June 2004, 20:39

There are a shitload of countries that go along with anything the U$ does. It kind of reminds me of the schoolyard bully with all his little minions beating the shit out of helpless little kids for there lunch money or new toy. And every now and again he also beats the shit out of his little minions to show his superiority especially in front of other kids. However, there will be one day where he'll get his.

I'll be willing to bet the CIA has already started funding these opposition mofos. This scenario has become all too familiar. Democratically elected official gets into the presidency, displays socialists tendancies, pisses off the jack-offs at the Pentagon and CIA headquarters, funneling of illegal money to the opposition in efforts to topple "the threat" of socialism, etc

*cuts a piece of American pie*

more Pinochet pie anyone???

fernando

2nd June 2004, 21:09

Hmm...Pinochet...*gets a very big knife*

The idealist

3rd June 2004, 11:21

*Idly hands Fernando a chainsaw*

Louis Pio

3rd June 2004, 13:10

Btw, the danish Hands Off Venezuela campaign is doing a protest in front of the US embassy in Copenhagen on Monday. Well will see how it goes, we just started up the campaign so we are still trying to get support from unions, mp's etc.

Kez

3rd June 2004, 21:05

Can you give us a report of what happens Teis? Should motivate some of us here, would be good, especially with pictures.

fuerzasocialista

4th June 2004, 03:34

Guys I don't know if you heard but according to elmundo.es (Spanish News), the referendum is going to happen in August. There is still some more despute about the authenticity of the signatures that were gathered by the opposition. Lets see what happens...

By the way, anyone who is interested in news from Cuba, go to www.prensa-latina.com

I believe they also have an English transaltion and also some good links....

Kez

4th June 2004, 09:25

No doubt the reactionaries will use dirty tricks, but maybe this is a good thing. Look how the people have already started barricades.

Maybe this reactionary action will increase the class consiousness of the Venezuelan people, who will try to deepen the revolution as they see their gains being threatened.

fuerzasocialista

5th June 2004, 01:24

The opposition jack-offs are already starting to insight riots and a bunch of other bullshit. I have faith that they will be defeated come the referendum. But I can't help but think that the U$ is going to have some bullshit up its sleeve.

Louis Pio

5th June 2004, 13:06

on the referendum: Venezuela: Bolivarian masses anger at referendum decision (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venezuela_ref_dec.html)

Lacrimi de Chiciură

6th June 2004, 07:22

Thanks for all of the information, guys. I was pretty clueless as to what was going on there before I read some of those articles.

Louis Pio

7th June 2004, 16:59

Italian National Metal Workers Union support Venezuela (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/articles/italian_metal_workers.html)

The National Congress of the FIOM-CGIL, the largest metalworkers' union in Italy, has passed a resolution recognising the UNT, and the union's national secretary Gianni Rinaldini signed the Hands Off Venezuela appeal. (June 7, 2004).

This should be an example to follow for everybody active in their union.

Louis Pio

11th June 2004, 18:51

here's the report from our small picket in Copenhagen.

Protest against US interference in Venezuela in Denmark (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/articles/copenhagen_report.html)

Also there has been one in Milan, Italy.
The Venezuelan Revolution must also be defended in Italy! (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/articles/Milan_report.html)

And here's a new article on the situation in Venezuela. It's dealing with the anger people have against the referendum fraud. It seems people wont accept that the opposition by lying and fraud can get their ways.
Massive Bolivarian march launches referendum battle (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/massive_bolivarian_march.html)

Kez

11th June 2004, 22:57

Here are a few of the pics from the Danes

Kez

11th June 2004, 22:59

More importantly,this is what we should all be doing

Louis Pio

11th June 2004, 23:42

We seem to be getting support in some unions now, which are deffinitely a step forward. :)
Also it seems that we have finally got those lazy left MP's off their ass and gotten them to support the campaign.

If I knew you would post the pictures I would have worn my nice outfit :P

fernando

12th June 2004, 01:33

Oh Kez...I mailed the German section of the "hands off venezuela" but ok...I dont really speak German...but what happened, I was contacted by the Belgium section of the group...I didnt know you were also in belgium, I can speak that :lol:

So Im probably going to get signatures from people soon! :lol:

Louis Pio

12th June 2004, 01:46

There was a speaking tour in Belgium half a year ago on the situation and there will probably be one again.
Which part do you live in?

bobby

4th July 2004, 23:33

I've read a lot about Venezuela's situation, mainly from Z Magazine or sources like that, and I support Chavez and the workers of Venezuela completely.

Bush merely wants to topple another "socialist experiment," as they often call it.

Louis Pio

7th July 2004, 14:32

Mass wave of enthusiasm must be used to complete the revolution! (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venez_santaines_en.html)

New article on the recallreferendum and the large pro-chavez demonstrations, includes pictures.

Sabocat

8th July 2004, 13:32

Another good article regarding the situation by the Socialist Worker.

VENEZUELA
Signs of new effort against Chavez
Is the U.S. getting ready for a coup?

By Chuck Stemke July 9, 2004

IS THE U.S. trying to mobilize its allies in the right-wing Colombian government to aid in the overthrow of President Hugo Chávez in neighboring Venezuela? The Chávez government arrested a group of about 100 people--most of them members of right-wing Colombian paramilitary organizations, which are closely linked with the Colombian state--outside of the capital city of Caracas in May. The group is alleged to have planned an assassination attempt against Chávez, and now faces trial before a military court.

Chávez and his left-wing populism are a longstanding target of the Venezuelan elite--backed up by the U.S. Chávez was actually arrested and flown into exile during an April 2002 coup--only to return to Venezuela in triumph after a massive mobilization of the poor forced the coup makers to back down.

Chávez’s opponents--within Venezuela and in Washington--have kept up the pressure, finally forcing the president to agree to a national referendum on his rule, set for August. Chávez opponents claim that the arrests in the assassination plot are a ruse designed to win support for the referendum.

But there are reasons to believe that the threat is real. On April 13, the Colombian Senate passed a resolution calling on the U.S.-dominated Organization of American States (OAS) to use the Interamerican Democratic Charter against Chávez’s "dictatorial regime"--effectively, a sanction for military action.

The original version of the resolution was written in poor Spanish and is widely believed to have been written by officials of the U.S. State Department. More ominous is the fact that the U.S. brokered a deal with Spain to sell Colombia 46 AMX-30 tanks, supposedly to fight its civil war against rebel groups.

The rest (http://www.socialistworker.org/2004-2/506/506_06_Venezuela.shtml)

Abajo con el imperialismo

15th July 2004, 01:22

imperialist dogs... they have nothing better to do than disturbing the world peace.
Victoria a la revolucion!

Louis Pio

18th July 2004, 18:29

A new article, dealing with the question of workers power. In Venezuela we are now seeing what can be described as Soviets (workers councils).

El Valle (Caracas) – Workers' democracy in action - Revolutionary assembly prepares referendum battle (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venez_maisanta0604.html)

Louis Pio

29th July 2004, 12:41

Manu Chao, the popular singer, has sent the Hands Off Venezuela Campaign a long text (in Spanish) in solidarity with the venezuelan people and calling for a massive participation in the referendum and to vote to defend the Bolivarian revolution. (July 26, 2004)

http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/de_manu_chao.html

rahul

1st August 2004, 10:55

how many more days for communist venezula?

socialistfuture

2nd August 2004, 05:09

here is an intresting piece from the greenleft weekly - an austrialian socialist paper.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2004/592/592p17.htm

from the article

this is a particually telling piece about what Chavez is up against...

'Perhaps recognising that Chavez will win the referendum, former president and leading opposition figure Carlos Perez stated in an interview printed on July 25 in El Nacional, one of Venezuela's main daily newspapers: “Violence will allow us to remove him. That's the only way we have.” Speaking from Miami, Perez said Chavez “must die like a dog, because he deserves it”.

Like the rest of the opposition, Perez denounced Chavez as a “dictator” while making it clear he believes democracy must be crushed in Venezuela if Chavez and his supporters are to be defeated. “We can't just get rid of Chavez and immediately have a democracy”, Perez said. After Chavez is violently ousted, Perez said a transition period of “two or three years” would be needed in which the country would be ruled by “a collegiate body (junta)” before popular elections could be held.'

great stuff - all those who have been getting out into the public supporting venezuela. victory to the people of venezuela!

YA BASTA!!!!

redstar2000

2nd August 2004, 23:21

A new board about Venezuela...

http://VenezuelaSolidarity.org.uk

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

Sabocat

6th August 2004, 15:39

Good website. Thanks Redstar. I found this great article about Jimmy Carter and the Carter Center which supposedly looks after elections to make sure they're fair.

They tell a very different story in this article. It exposes the hypocrisy of this "Center" If Carter was so interested in fair elections, where the hell was he in 2000? The article goes on to talk about the election subversion Carter has brought to other "fair and democratic" elections.

Here's an excerpt:

Carter Certifies a Stolen Election: Dominican Republic 1990

In 1993, I spent several hours interviewing Juan Bosch, the Dominican Republic's most notable democratic political leader. He told me that in the aftermath of the presidential elections of 1990, which he legally won, his opponent, the rightist, pro-US Juan Balaguer, engaged in massive theft, witnessed by poll watchers. Jimmy Carter headed the mission "monitoring" the election. Bosch presented Carter with a wealth of documents and testimony, witnesses and photos of Balaguer supporters dumping ballots in the river. Carter acknowledged the corruption and fraud, but urged Bosch to accept the results "to avoid a civil war". Bosch accused Carter of covering up to gain a US client. He led a march of 500,000 in protest. Carter certified Balaguer as the product of a "free election" and left. Balaguer proceeded to repress, pillage and privatize basic services.

Haiti I: Carter the Smiling Blackmailer

In 1990, Bertrand Aristide, a very popular former priest was leading in the polls with over 70% against a US-backed former World Bank functionary, Marc Bazin with barely 15% of popular support. Jimmy Carter, the self-styled neutral electoral monitor, set up a meeting with Aristide in which he demanded that Aristide withdraw from the elections in favor of the unpopular US candidate in order to avoid a "bloodbath". Carter did everything in his power to frighten Aristide and deny the populace its right to choose its president. Carter must have known in advance from his contacts with President Bush (Senior) that Washington was intent on preventing Haiti from taking an independent road. Eight months after Aristide's accession to the Presidency, a coup, backed by the US took place. Aristide was ousted and replaced and Carter's preferred candidate, Marc Bazin, was appointed Prime Minister, backed by a paramilitary terrorist group called FRAPH that instituted a "bloodbath" killing more than 4,000 Haitians. Carter and Bush, the quiet diplomat and the President with the iron fist worked in tandem, when the first failed, the latter stepped in.

Haiti II: General Cedras--Sunday School Teacher--1991-94

With Aristide out of the way, the US-backed regime proceeded to massacre thousands of Haitian supporters of the former elected President. The key member of the governing junta was General Cedras. With thousands of Haitians fleeing his brutal regime and heading for Florida, Jimmyb Carter spoke in defense of the bloody General Cedras, "I believe and trust in General Cedras." Later Carter gushed, "I believe he would be a worthy Sunday school teacher." Carter later certified the respectability of the disreputable dictator on his way to exile--after emptying the treasury. President Clinton convoked a meeting with Aristide in Washington. A Congressional aide privy to the meeting told me that Clinton's aide handed Aristide a neo-liberal program and list of cabinet ministers and told him his return to Haiti was contingent on accepting Washington's dictates. After many hours of psychological pressure, threats and arguments, Aristide capitulated. Clinton allowed him to return. Carter welcomed the return of "democracy" -US style.

Kind of dispells the notion of the "kindly, liberal, statesman" doesn't it? ;)

The Rest (http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1213)

Louis Pio

6th August 2004, 16:11

Carter is the "left" boot of US imperialism and the hawks the right.
Both serve a purpose in my oppinion

Louis Pio

11th August 2004, 14:32

2 articles.
Especially the first is interesting, very interesting
The biggest demonstration in the history of Venezuela (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/caracas_august_8.html)
Why Marxists are fighting for a “No” next Sunday (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/august_15_approaches.html)

Citizen X

11th August 2004, 23:29

I'm very glad to see that others are aware of what's happening in Venezuela. Most Americans can't even tell what's going on in the presidential campaign, so I'm pleased that there are people who understand that the world is larger than Bush/Kerry.

Another good place for analysis is Venezuela Watch (http://www.zmag.org/venezuela_watch.cfm). There's a new article posted there from Palast which says that ChoicePoint gave info to the Justice Department about a number of Latin American nations. Incredible, but that's the way it goes when rabid right-wing fundamentalists take control of the government.

Tondbert

12th August 2004, 15:09

I really hope a wave of revolutions take place in Latin America. I would be so happy if Chile and Argentina rose into communist, or at least socialist states. My dad was there supporting Allende, and I for one will be supporting every left-wing movement in Latin America that I can. If theres anything I could get involved in I would be more than happy to help.

Louis Pio

12th August 2004, 15:13

Well the consciousness among Latin American workers is rising quickly. Also they have much experience to learn from, Chile etc.
In my oppinion Latin America is were revolutions is most likely to break out (I know some disagree with that), people have experienced how fucked up IMF is and how capitalism can't provide for them.
What is needed now is a revolutionary party to unite these people, especially in Venezuela that task is urgent.

If your interested in Latin America you can take a look here http://www.marxist.com/latinamerica.asp

Tondbert

12th August 2004, 15:24

Whats the opposition like? I mean, far enough since we are on the leftist side of things that is mostly what we are seeing. But what do all the rightists think on the situation in Venezuela?

Louis Pio

12th August 2004, 15:36

Well they think Chavez is a left populist. Who are only in power due to the stupid workers and poor. More over they think he is ruining the economy.
So it's basically the usual upper class arrogant views, based on what is good to their wealth.

Of course there is also some people who claim to be neither pro chavez or the opposition. But the way the Venezuelan society is moving people need to take sides at some point. Or at least not stand in the way of social change.

fernando

12th August 2004, 16:53

Well...I hope Chavez comes to power, socialism...I dont have that many problems with it to a certain extend...I still believe there should be some form of free trade and "capitalism" I mean that people will get rewarded for working harder. Not that what you had in former "communist" nations that it didnt really matter if you worked hard or not, you would get the same anyway and if you had a different opinion the secret police would hunt you down and you would die.

I know US supported regimes have done that too, but that does not mean we could just go and do that in order to force out ideologies upon the people.

dadachango69

15th August 2004, 03:58

Originally posted by Citizen [email protected] 11 2004, 07:29 PM
I'm very glad to see that others are aware of what's happening in Venezuela. Most Americans can't even tell what's going on in the presidential campaign, so I'm pleased that there are people who understand that the world is larger than Bush/Kerry.

Another good place for analysis is Venezuela Watch (http://www.zmag.org/venezuela_watch.cfm). There's a new article posted there from Palast which says that ChoicePoint gave info to the Justice Department about a number of Latin American nations. Incredible, but that's the way it goes when rabid right-wing fundamentalists take control of the government.
Wonderful syght, Citizen X. Thanks for this. Latino america will be the model of true democracy one day.

QUE VIVA U.S.L.A. !!

Intifada

15th August 2004, 17:03

The meaningless referendum is today.

DaCuBaN

15th August 2004, 17:35

http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article....48&sectionID=45 (http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=6048&sectionID=45)

ZNet | Venezuela

The Calm Before the?

by Justin Podur; August 15, 2004

Today is the day before the referendum. Not only is campaigning formally closed, but there is also a law in effect, quite common in Latin America, that no alcohol is to be sold or consumed until well after the referendum. And with good reason, given that both the NO and the SI forces want their followers to be up by 3am and voting by 6am.

The Opposition Plan

One can put together the comments of the various opposition figures (please see the previous entry on the Mendoza press conference) and get a picture of what the opposition plan is. Short of some kind of violent provocation (and there have been warnings of that as well) to try to discredit the whole electoral process, the opposition has signalled repeatedly that it plans to announce the results at 2pm. Then, when the real results are announced after the polls close at 6pm, the opposition will say (assuming that the opposition loses the referendum, which it will if there is not fraud) that its results disagree with the official results and argue that a fraud has occurred. At that point things will depend on the integrity of the Carter Center and the OAS (gulp). That is not strictly true. There are all kinds of observers here, more media than ever before, so things will depend on the ability of everyone with integrity to get the truth out past all of those who are going to lie about the result. My own suspicion, based on the highly unscientific methods of watching the SI rallies and talking to random people, is that the result will be closer than the NO forces might like, but quite decisive.

If the SI forces claims are then discredited, as they should be, they and the US will just keep the “fraud” card in their hand, waiting for the correlation of forces to change. Then, at some point down the road, if Chavez loses a substantial chunk of support, or the army, or the oil company, they will bring out the claim that the referendum was “fraudulent” when they try to bring him down. This is the way the same kinds of forces used the Haitian elections of 2000 in legitimating the coup that happened there this year. For now, though, it is hard to think of what else they will be able to do.

As for the role the 2pm announcement of the results by the opposition might play, it is again hard to know. It could create some disorder and confusion, but it seems that everyone has been trying to prepare the electorate for it at any rate. This morning in a press conference, the President of the state television channel 8, Vladimir Villegas, had it right. He said “The opposition is announcing that they are going to announce the results tomorrow at 2pm. The polls open at 6am and close at 6pm. How are they going to know the results four hours before the polls close. If they are going to announce it at 2pm, I would invite them to announce the results now! They are not going to know anything then that they do not know now!” And it is that absurd. (For more detail on the opposition plan and strategy, see the piece by Jonah Gindin today on ZNet and venezuelanalysis.com)

Control Rooms

In spite of the absence of campaignings, today is a day of frantic activity. I realize I promised that I would do interviews. And I have met a lot of interesting people with a lot of interest to say. Every single one of them has one response when I ask them for an interview. “Of course! Call me just as soon as the referendum is over!” Fair enough. Indeed, even if the opposition plans some bad business, it is as likely to come immediately after the referendum as it is to come before.

But people are better prepared this time around. If anti imperialists were kicking themselves for not doing more to stop the coup in 2002 (we were) they are trying to learn from their mistakes. I know of at least two alternative media “control rooms” that are being set up. One is by the intrepid NarcoNews team (check them out at narconews.com and the narcosphere blog) and another is organized by aporrea.org. What they have here is a lot like some of the best indymedia centres I have seen at the big anti globalization demonstrations and meetings. Indymedia from many countries are here, rebelion.org, aporrea.org, antiescualidos.com, lots of alternative radio folks from all over Latin America and Europe. They have set up computers, techies, phones, food… people are even staying here. Of course there are all the sensible security precautions… they say they have been hacked already, more than once. The idea of both control rooms is to create a real newsroom where people can complement each others work, where people can check and cross check information (this one has four televisions, each tuned to a different news channel) and complement each others efforts.) If things do get ugly, we have learned from (at least some) of our mistakes and can (hopefully) do better than last time.

The most likely scenario for tomorrow is also the best case scenario. A clean, uneventful day of voting, resulting in a sound victory for the NO forces, and a big party to follow. That is what I would like to be reporting tomorrow. Stay tuned, regardless.

dadachango69

16th August 2004, 17:49

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/WORLD/americas/08/16/venezuela.recall/long.chavez.ap.jpg

=D =D =D =D =D =D =D =D =D =D =D =D

Louis Pio

16th August 2004, 19:27

The recall referendum in Venezuela - A crushing blow to the counterrevolution (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/recall_referendum_venezuela.html)

New article, looks at the election and what is the way forward. We all need to realise that this is not solving the situation. The reaction will stil try to take power and Venezuela is still capitalist.

From the article
"The 15 August will enter the annals of revolutionary history as a great victory for the working people – on one condition: that we do not waste it, that we do not hand the initiative back to our enemies, but strike blows against them that will destroy the basis of their power. That is the only way we can build upon our victory, and turn it into a decisive revolutionary transformation of society"

KrazyRabidSheep

17th August 2004, 03:15

Originaly posted @ http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...nm/venezuela_dc (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=3&u=/nm/20040817/ts_nm/venezuela_dc)

Chavez Wins Referendum, Vows to Deepen Revolution

By Patrick Markey

CARACAS, Venezuela (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez easily won a referendum on his rule and offered on Monday to open a dialogue with his opponents, while vowing to intensify the reforms at the heart of the nation's political conflict.

World oil prices eased on hopes the clear result would end more than two years of confrontation between the populist leader and critics who say he wants to convert the world's fifth-largest oil exporter to Cuban-style communism.

A triumphant Chavez, who survived a coup two years ago and a grueling oil industry strike a year later, urged his opponents to accept his offer of talks.

"We've initiated a new phase to deepen this project. ... The people must know that now more than ever we will pay the social debt," said Chavez, whose reforms have diverted oil wealth to housing, medicine and education for the poor.

But opposition leaders pledged to prove their assertions that the referendum result was a "gigantic fraud," despite its endorsement so far by international observers.

"We will not rest until we have proved that the will of the Venezuelan people was ignored," said Enrique Mendoza of the opposition Democratic Coordinator coalition, adding that the referendum should be repeated.

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, who led the observers' mission, said its checks matched results from the National Electoral Council, which gave Chavez 58 percent of the vote in Sunday's recall election.

Chavez' victory was a blistering defeat for the opposition, a coalition of political parties, labor unions and civilian groups that fought for more than a year to secure a vote against a leader they accuse of authoritarian rule.

After the results, Caracas remained calm apart from small pockets of protests. Gunmen on motorbikes wounded at least seven people in wealthy eastern Caracas after opposition leaders called for protests.

One of the injured, an elderly woman, later died in a hospital, officials said. Mendoza blamed pro-Chavez supporters for the attack but pledged the opposition would use peaceful, democratic means to challenge the government.

SUPPORT FROM POOR

Critics forced the referendum on Chavez by obtaining 2.4 million signatures on a petition, but the results showed the country's poor backed the charismatic president, a friend of Cuban leader Fidel Castro (news - web sites).

Buoyed by soaring oil prices, Chavez had bolstered public spending on his programs for the impoverished majority.

Chavez foes often criticized top National Electoral Council officials as biased in favor of the president, who was first elected in 1998. They said the recall results were a fraud aided by electronic voting machines.

But Carter said no signs of fraud had been found so far.

In Washington, U.S. officials said the observers' assessment pressured the opposition to either accept defeat or flesh out their fraud claims so they could be investigated.

Chavez presents himself as a regional voice against U.S. imperialism, and he has clashed frequently with Washington over the direction of his left-leaning government. But he said he hoped the vote result would help improve relations.

Oil markets worried that a Chavez defeat could trigger unrest in the military and the state oil firm PDVSA, sectors he has purged to ensure key posts are in the hands of loyalists. But Venezuelan oil industry officials said operations were running normally after the vote.

Oil prices slipped from record highs close to $47 to about $46 a barrel, with energy traders saying Chavez's victory eased the threat of disruptions to exports, especially to the United States.

The clean victory for Chavez leaves his critics with few options but to regroup before congressional elections next year and a presidential election in 2006.

But the victory also raises questions about where the firebrand leader will take his "Bolivarian revolution" -- a mix of nationalist ideas of Venezuelan liberation hero Simon Bolivar and socialist tenets of equality.

(Additional reporting by Silene Ramirez, Matthew Robinson and Pascal Fletcher in Venezuela and Saul Hudson in Washington)

Kez

17th August 2004, 09:39

while vowing to intensify the reforms at the heart of the nation's political conflict.

dadachango69

19th August 2004, 00:42

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39949000/jpg/_39949864_chavezpointap203.jpg

Louis Pio

23rd August 2004, 12:47

We have just received the following declaration of the comrades of the Venezuelan Revolutionary Marxist Current (CMR), which we are pleased to republish in English and Spanish for our readers’ information. It is, in effect, a transitional programme that, taking its starting point from the concrete conditions of the Venezuelan revolution, explains what steps are necessary to build upon the victory in the referendum, carry the revolution forward and pose the question of workers’ power and socialism.

CMR Declaration
THE REVOLUTION HAS WON A MOST IMPORTANT VICTORY:
NOW WE MUST DEVELOP THE STRENGTH OF THE WORKERS, CARRY THE REVOLUTION TO THE END AND MOVE TOWARDS SOCIALISM
The revolution has just won a major triumph. The referendum victory is indisputable proof of the people’s will not to accept any retreat in the revolutionary process, to defend the conquests in the field of health, education and in the level of organization and consciousness, and its will to carry the struggle forward.

This victory was won by the working class together with the popular-democratic revolutionary forces. It provides us with an enormously advantageous situation, since it has plunged the pro-imperialist sectors of the Coordinadora and the Bloque Democrático, and all the enemies of the revolution, into the deepest demoralization.

This victory must not be thrown away by false appeals for the unity of the nation, which includes those who organized the coup d’etat of April 11 2002, and the criminal bosses’ lockout of December 2, the provocative guarimbas, the infiltration of paramilitary forces, and who have murdered more than a hundred workers’ and peasants’ leaders.

We are already hearing and seeing it: the Coordinadora Democrática and the Bloque Democrático do not want to recognise the victory of the NO vote and their bosses in the government of Washington, although they say they do, act as if they do not.

In the hour of victory, we cannot allow ourselves to be deceived by those sections of the bourgeoisie who now come forward waving the white flag of surrender. This merely reflects their weakness and our strength. They are only doing this to gain time and prepare new ambushes like the one they prepared in the past for revolutionaries like Emiliano Zapata in México, or Augusto César Sandino in Nicaragua, or in our own country in 2002, when Chávez pardoned them after the coup of 11April.

Nor must this victory be used as a smokescreen to cover up the responsibility of those elements in the government (ministers, institutions, governors, mayors etc.) who have been behaving in a bureaucratic manner. These people have been carrying out anti-working class and anti-popular policies that are similar to those of the enemies of the revolution, such as the sackings of thousands of workers, the violation of collective agreements and of the rights of the people.

This victory was prepared by the people, the workers by hand or brain of both town and countryside, through sacrifice and bitter struggles against those who derive their privileges solely as a result of holding leading positions and have sought to prevent the development of popular participation in decision-making and the democratic election of the genuine leaders of the movement.

We must make use of this victory, which further weakens the counterrevolutionary forces, to carry the revolution forward by taking concrete political, economic and social measures that will cut the ground from under the feet of the imperialist bourgeoisie and the national lackeys that serve it, and to put an end to the looting and exploitation and prevent the preparation of new destructive and painful conspiracies.

We must advance towards our own victory. This means that the patrols and UBEs must be transformed into genuine organizations of revolutionary political struggle. They must become the embryos of power that will replace the existing governmental institutions that are standing in the way of a genuine democracy in which the masses will play the role of active protagonists.

The patrols and UBEs must discuss the organization of mass meetings of all those who support the revolution in every sector, neighbourhood, local area etc. These meetings must have the right to elect the candidates to the next elections. At the same time, these assemblies of all the active elements, patrulleros, members of Bolivarian circles, misiones, etc. must elect the commandos, and the latter must be subject to recall.

These embryonic organs of workers power must also take up the demands of the local neighbourhoods, to decide how to distribute the municipal, state and national budgets. The revolutionary rank and file that makes up the patrullas and other revolutionary combat organizations must also elect delegates, subject to recall, to a great national revolutionary assembly, which must elect the leading bodies of the revolution. The latter must be answerable at all times to the revolutionary assemblies and be subject to the right of recall by them.

This system of workers power, based on the democratic decisions of the workers and other oppressed layers, must be reproduced at every level. The students must democratise the centres of learning, electing all the educative authorities; every student, teacher, worker and employee must have a vote in the elaboration of the syllabus and there must be free education for all.

The patrols (patrullas) and UBEs, as the embryos of a new power leading to a genuine workers’ government (as stated in the founding document of the UNT) must fight for the extension of a free and good quality health service to all the people; to fight to open up the workplaces closed by the bosses, to take over those that threaten to close or sack workers and to institute workers control in the workplaces, and in this way to put an end to the violations of workers’ rights and solve the problem of unemployment.

WE MUST CARRY THE REVOLUTION TO THE END AND MOVE TO SOCIALISM

We must speed up the revolution and carry it to the end in order to solve the problems that the masses are suffering. History teaches us that a revolution that stops halfway will be defeated (as happened in Chile, Portugal and Nicaragua). In a capitalist world in crisis , where unemployment and exploitation are increasing even in the most advanced countries, the only way to solve the problems of the workers and the popular masses is by adopting the following measures, basing ourselves on the embryos of workers’ power, like the patrols and UBEs:

-Nationalization of the banking system under workers control.

-Non-payment of the foreign debt: let these resources be used instead for productive purposes: to put the economy, which is now at the mercy of the price of oil, on a solid base.

-The nationalization of the basic industries under workers control.

-Nationalization of internal and external trade.

-The setting up of self-defence brigades in every neighbourhood, workplace, town and village to maintain order and protect the people.

-For the establishment of a workers’ and people’s militia to defend the revolution from any internal or external aggression.

-Nationalization under workers’ control of the big food and transport companies.

-Workers’ control and management of PDVSA that will guarantee a majority of workers on all the decisive organs of management.

-Workers’ control of the mass media to put an end to the constant counterrevolutionary agitation in the media, a campaign that is still continuing despite the clear victory on August 15.

-Military instruction for the masses: “every fisherman, every student, every member of the people must learn how to use a rifle, because that is the conception of the people in arms.” (Hugo Chávez,: Aló Presidente, April 2004).

All this can only be carried out through the establishment of a genuine workers’ government, based on workers’ and peoples’ assemblies.

Last but not least, it is necessary to overcome the dispersal of the revolutionary vanguard, which must be united on the basis of the ideas of revolutionary Marxism. These ideas are the concentrated expression of more than 150 years of internationalist struggles. They are the only ideas that can guarantee the victory of the revolution: that is to say, the taking of power by the working class itself.

In order to attain this end it is necessary to group together the most advanced sections of the worker and people’s activists and the youth in a Marxist cadre organization that can give to the revolution a clear socialist content.

If you agree with these ideas, then join us! We are fighting to create a strong Revolutionary Marxist Current as an integral part of the mass movement, which, while supporting the social revolutionary process in Venezuela, are fighting to deepen it and impart to it a socialist character.

Set up a group of the CMR in your neighbourhood, village, workplace, school or collage, or wherever you can. Come and join us! Together we will fight for total victory!

Caracas, Wednesday, August 18, 2004.

See also:

http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/cmr_declara..._august_15.html (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/cmr_declaration_august_15.html)

h&s

1st September 2004, 14:05

Originally posted by BBC
Venezuela land reforms to push on

Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez, who survived a referendum earlier this month, has vowed to step up controversial agricultural reforms.
The government plans to enforce a 2001 land law that allows it to either tax or seize unused land, Mr Chavez said during his weekly television address.

"We are going after the idle land and will put it to work," he said.

The issue has provoked strong emotions in a country where a minority own the majority of agricultural land.

Both sides

Critics claim that Mr Chavez is trying to enforce a communist-style economic programme that ignores property rights and will damage the country.

To his supporters, however, Mr Chavez is a champion of the poor who is taking steps to right many decades of neglect.

Mr Chavez tried to play down the threat he poses to the landed classes.

"We are not the enemy of the rural estates, we are not going to burn them, we are not going to invade land," he explained.

But, "in this stage of the revolution, I demand strict application of the constitution and the land law." However, some workers, impatient for the government to intervene, have already seized land.

Productivity check

The government will assess large estates and look at how best to utilise unused land.

The redistribution programme allows for some of it to be given over to peasant cooperatives, which will get state aid to farm the land.

The government last year said that it planned to hand out as much as 3.7 million acres (1.5 million hectares) to rural workers in the early stages of its programme, the Reuters news agency reported.

Mr Chavez is not afraid to ruffle feathers and has clashed with the US in the past.

Earlier this month, he won a referendum on his rule that had threatened to bring the country, and its key oil output, to a halt.

In 2002, he survived a coup attempt as well as months of strikes and mass opposition rallies.

DaCuBaN

1st September 2004, 14:44

It's actually happening reg! Can't you see?

Louis Pio

1st September 2004, 15:01

For all those who want to know more there's a public meeting 7. September in London
http://www.marxist.com/announcements/venez...nt_meeting.html (http://www.marxist.com/announcements/venezuela_parliament_meeting.html)

DaCuBaN

1st September 2004, 15:29

...of course thanks to maggie, there ain't no way I can make it to London :( I'm struggling to find the means to get down to Glasgow to visit my gran in hospital :angry:

fuerzasocialista

4th September 2004, 11:15

I could only wish they would implement these kinds of reforms back in my neck of the woods :(

Zingu

24th September 2004, 00:47

I'll do my part, best I can do is write a school newspaper article about this, to get people aware of the struggle there, I think I'll use some "Che" related content to get more people interested since its South America, it would fit in nicely, I would love to take suggestions. I'll have to read through all these articles before writing, so I'll post the rough draft here and you comrades can make some suggestions and corrections.

I think I'll use the title: "Venezuela: A People in a Struggle"

Anyways! Long live the Venezuelan Revolution! Resist American Imperialism! Support and solidarity with the Venezuelan workers!

Zingu

24th September 2004, 00:47

Zingu

24th September 2004, 00:47

Vallegrande

26th September 2004, 06:46

Correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't Thomas Jefferson himself say that revolutions need to occur every 20 years? I will have to check up on that. If it is true, America is long overdue for another one. :ph34r:

Vallegrande

26th September 2004, 06:46

Vallegrande

26th September 2004, 06:46

Gringo-a-Go-Go

28th September 2004, 20:45

We're not really talking about a socialist revolution in Venezuela yet.
These days I'm tossing around "a kinder, gentler peronism" in my mind, as regards Chavez' constant swinging between Left and center (if not Right...)

At some point the workers must take control of society themselves, at all levels.
And they're going to require force of arms to hold it.
At least the country has a president who is copacetic to that idea!

Gringo-a-Go-Go

28th September 2004, 20:45

Gringo-a-Go-Go

28th September 2004, 20:45

Louis Pio

28th September 2004, 20:52

At some point the workers must take control of society themselves, at all levels.

Exactly my point, for any of the gains to be kept and expanded a break with capitalism is required. And a call to the workers of Latin America to overthrow their rotten regimes. Such a call wouldn't fall on deaf ears in Latin America, especially considering the pan-Latin American feelings most workers and poor on the continent have.

Louis Pio

28th September 2004, 20:52

Louis Pio

28th September 2004, 20:52

fuerzasocialista

29th September 2004, 09:21

Such a call wouldn't fall on deaf ears in Latin America, especially considering the pan-Latin American feelings most workers and poor on the continent have.

All it takes is the voices of revolution to come together and unite under one common cause: A revoultion by the proletarians for the proletarians.

Problem is there has been a lot of supression and blatant miseducation keeping the masses at bay.....

fuerzasocialista

29th September 2004, 09:21

fuerzasocialista

29th September 2004, 09:21

Gringo-a-Go-Go

29th September 2004, 17:14

Ya, it's pretty clear that America Latina is lousy with the need for socialism. The situation all over the continent could be characterized as a tinderbox (not ever having been there, I must rely on information second- and third-hand).

What the people of America Latina require is either: good revolutionary leadership -- which they generally don't have (except maybe in Bolivia somewhat); or the circumstances to occur whereby they collectively decide to simply break out in spontaneous rebellion due to some rightwing provocation -- which seems the most likely course at this point in time. It would be preferential that the working-class didn't just charge ahead blindly, and make tons of needless and costly mistakes; but what are they going to do with such bad leadership at every turn??

Oh well: least-common denominator, and all that... Can't let sectarianism get in the way of La Revolucion: it's gonna happen, whether we're ready or not. Maybe how it's gonna go down will be that the U.S. ruling-class will get its Colombian proxies to invade Venezuela, alongside the internal fifth columnists, and workers all over South America will rise up to support the bolivarians and against their own mis-rulers; maybe revolution and civil war in Bolivia. Ecuador. Peru. Paraguay. There are a lot of pots reaching a boil on that stove...

Gringo-a-Go-Go

29th September 2004, 17:14

Gringo-a-Go-Go

29th September 2004, 17:14

Louis Pio

22nd October 2004, 08:51

As some of you might know the owners of the Venepal factory decided to shut it down. This has enraged the workers who are now demanding nationalisation of the factory and they then went on to occupy the factory. This is a very crucial step forward and an indication that the venezuelan workers are starting to see the need for themselves to plan production if capitalism can't provide.
The struggle of the Venepal workers – a crucial turning point for the Venezuelan revolution (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venepal.htm)

Furthermore the workers are now appealing for international solidarity, so I urge everyone to get of their ass and use the small amount of time this requires.

"Further to the information we published on the occupation of the Venepal paper mill in Venezuela by its workers, we have received a request for solidarity action. The workers are appealing for an international campaign demanding the nationalisation under workers’ control of this important industry."
Venepal Workers Solidarity Appeal (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/articles/venepal_workers_solidarity_appeal.html)

Subversive Pessimist

26th October 2004, 15:28

Hopefully if this Revolution is succesfull it will spread throughout Latin America, kicking the Americans out of our lands!

I don't understand how you can call that a revolution in the traditional sense of the word. He was elected. He didn't overthrow the government.

redstar2000

12th November 2004, 13:46

Big League table shows run of votes in Venezuela's new political mapping

Las Ultimas Noticias tabloid offers some details on Venezuela's new political map after the October 31 regional and municipal elections.

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=23448

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

BOZG

22nd November 2004, 10:09

Venezuelan State Prosecutor Danilo Anderson assassinated in cold blood in two-bomb explosion in Los Chaguaramos/Santa Monica

Full Article (http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=23570)

chebol

24th November 2004, 04:48

Hands Off Venezuela Campaign- http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org

Extraordinary meeting of Chavez with workers in Madrid

“The working class must be the vanguard of the revolution”

By Emilia Lucena, El Militante

It is nearly five o’clock. A shy autumn sun bathes the Prado Avenue on our way to the headquarters of the Workers’ Commissions (CCOO) in Madrid. When we arrive there are already more than 300 people queuing to get into the meeting hall. They patiently wait to attend the meeting with Chavez which is scheduled for 7 pm.

There is chaos. Lope de Vega is a narrow street and more and more people arrive to attend the meeting. The hall stewards are overwhelmed, some of them surprised by the enormous expectation, some ask what is the matter with Chavez and some even ask who Chavez is (one mixes him up with Andalusia president Chaves). The police officers cannot understand and do not know what attitude to adopt. One of them tries to show that he is in charge, and demonstrates the usual arrogant and contemptuous attitude of the police, but nobody pays any notice. They are all either sufficiently happy or enthused with the perspective of meeting Chavez, and are not prepared to fall into any provocations. During the nearly two hour wait, the queue breaks into singing and shouting of slogans in defence of the Venezuelan revolution and its president.

It is nearly 7pm when the doors open, and the human tide is allowed in, in groups of five. We must go through a metal detector. It is just four days since the State Prosecutor investigating those involved in the April 11 coup has died, assassinated in a terrorist attack carried out by the forces of reaction. Nobody complains. We all understand the need to take all necessary security measures. We are aware that the international counter-revolution has set its sights on Chavez.

Slowly the meeting hall fills up. There is the shouting of slogans and the singing of songs. We are shown a video of the revolution. Some singers and musicians go on stage to entertain the people before Chavez’s arrival. Amongst them are the extraordinary Olga Manzano and Quintin Cabrera, but also many others, who do not feature in the commercial music scene, but want to show their solidarity and sympathy for the revolution. Of course, [Spanish singer] Alejandro Sanz, the gusano who said that Chavez should resign because the people of Venezuela were against him, and who has now been shut up by the results of the recall referendum, is not there.

A terrible moment. It is announced that the president will not come. It is half past eight. The audience is stunned. Disillusionment runs through all those present, but it is agreed that the meeting will continue. We want to show our support for the revolution, but the mood has changed from one of enthusiasm to a disheartened one. We wanted to listen to Chavez, the leader of the Venezuelan revolution.

William Lara, the former president of the Venezuelan National Assembly and Member of Parliament, addresses the audience. His speech does not connect. He says that Venezuela is a paradise for investment from Spanish businesses. There is a stunned, and a little bit of an angry silence. These are the same businesses that exploit us day in and day out. These are the same businesses that hire young people and immigrant workers as cheap labour without rights, and demand more flexibility for wages and working conditions! We know they are not going to create wealth in Venezuela, in the same way they do not create wealth for the people here. William Lara continues with his speech and at the end adds, like an afterthought, that this investment will not have the same exploitive character as in the past. The question everybody is asking themselves is: does William Lara really know what employers are? Does he know that their profits come from our exploitation? Does he realize that they will not invest a single cent unless they have a firm guarantee that they will recover their investment tenfold by keeping the majority of the population in poverty? While Lara speaks a rumour makes the rounds: “Chavez is coming”, first it is just in the front rows, then moves throughout the hall. Nobody pays much attention to anything apart from whether Chavez is coming or not. From the stage nothing is said about this, William Lara continues to speak. At the end a powerful voice from the audience says: “Chavez is coming”. There is a spontaneous ovation. The mood is cheerful again. Now the musicians go on stage and we all sing along and clap to the songs. Later we found out what had happened. A group of people, led by Manolo Espinar of the Haydee Santamaria organisationa and JM Municio from El Militante, had gone to the Circulo de Bellas Artes, where Chavez was meeting a group of intellectuals and actors, and explained to him that 1500 workers and youth were waiting for him in the CCOO meeting hall. And they managed to bring him along! When Chavez found out that we were waiting, he did not hesitate: “I am going over there, even if it is just to give a 15 minute greeting”. As he himself said later: “thank you, you have rescued me from the intellectuals to bring me to the workers”.

The hours go by and he still does not arrive. The banners in the hall still speak solidarity from the walls. Amongst them is one from El Militante and the Sindicato de Estudiantes (Spanish Students Union) which reads: “Venepal: nationalization under workers control”.

Nobody leaves. Now and then the news is confirmed: despite the delay, Chavez is coming. We are waiting. Messages of support are read to the meeting. At the beginning two were read from the Alliance of Anti-imperialist Intellectuals and another one from Culture against War. Then they read the one from the Sindicato de Estudiantes, which was interrupted by ovations twice. Then, in between the songs, others are read: from the Communist Party, the Red Current, El Militante, the international Hands Off Venezuela Campaign ... We sing some songs and then The Internationale. The whole room has raised fists as the Internationale comes out of our throats like the shout of revolutionary struggle, solidarity and proletarian internationalism.

At last, at 10:30 pm, after waiting for more than 5 hours, Chavez arrives! The enthusiasm is overwhelming. There is a standing ovation and raised fists as we greet him.

He is standing on stage. He is obviously tired but also moved by the greeting and the enthusiasm overfilling the hall. He apologises for the delay, and starts by reciting a poem by [Spanish revolutionary poet] Garcia Lorca.

He begins to address the crowd. He talks about the revolution, the oppressed, the oligarchy and imperialism that organized the coup in April 2002, how he thought he was going to be shot dead, and how the soldiers, arms in hand, avoided it. “There, facing the death squad, I though of Che (...) how men die”. He explains how thousands and thousands of workers, the poor, surrounded the Miraflores Palace defending the revolution. “They tried once and failed, and if they tried again they would fail again, because in Venezuela the arms are in the hands of the soldiers, who are part of the people”. He mentions the coup against Allende: “the Chilean revolution failed because it was a peaceful and unarmed revolution. The Bolivarian revolution is peaceful... but armed”. We understand very well what he is talking about. We also know about our own past. The audience begins to shout, fists raised again, “the people, armed, will never be smashed” (“el pueblo armado, jamás será aplastado”).

Now he talks about the money from [state oil company] PDVSA, which is being used for social programs, and he mentions Cuba and the Cuban doctors. There is another standing ovation and shouts of “Chavez, Fidel y el Che”.

He mentions the shipyard workers [fighting for months against the closure of the shipyards]. The whole audience shouts, “The shipyards will not be closed down!” He talks about the democratic revolution in Venezuela, of how the people support the revolution. He talks of the peoples of Latin America. “If Bolivar lived today, he would be a socialist”. He also mentions Marx. Incidentally, on his way in, he stopped to browse at the bookstall of El Militante. He spoke to the comrades. When he saw Alan Woods’ books he said: “Oh, Alan Woods. He is a friend of mine”. We want to give him the books he has chosen as a present, amongst them several by Alan Woods, Ted Grant and Trotsky, but he insists he wants to pay for them. At the end he accepts Alan Woods’ “Bolshevism, the road to revolution” as a gift.

He now talks about the workers and the need for unity. “There is a socialist international and a Christian Democratic international. Why can’t we form a democratic and revolutionary international? Unite all the oppressed peoples, the workers, the indigenous peoples ...”. There is another standing ovation. He develops the idea: “the working class must be the vanguard of the revolution (...) It should not only concern itself with immediate or wage demands, which are necessary and must be fought for, but it must also look beyond, to the transformation of society as a whole”. The enthusiasm is overwhelming. “Long live the working class”, and “the working class has no borders” are slogans which become alive and are shouted by the whole audience as one.

During the speech, standing up, he has been given cups of coffee which he drank. It has been a very packed day. He was at the Complutense University, where the students also received him with enthusiasm, surpassing all expectations. He met with Zapatero, with artists and intellectuals in the Circulo de Bellas Artes, and then at 10:30 pm he met with the workers... The best part of it, he snubbed a meeting with big business. Today the media complain and say this is not acceptable because he snubbed a meeting with 200 “business leaders”. Today, workers understand more who Chavez is and the support he receives from Venezuelan workers.

It is past 11:30 and finally he says goodbye. As he leaves the hall, as when he came in, there is a standing ovation. We are all shouting, “the revolution forward, forward, and those who do not like it, will have to stand it” (“La revolución p’alante, p’alante y al que no le guste que se joda y que se aguante”.)

As always, everywhere he goes, this enthusiasm is also expressed in the desire to get close to him, to greet him personally. Despite the bodyguards and the security measures, when he comes out he is surrounded by a sea of hands showing their solidarity and support for the Venezuelan revolution. He is extremely polite, tactful and educated, and in an impossible attempt, he tries to greet and talk to all those who come close to him. He understands that this show of solidarity reflects the desire of workers to show, through him, to the workers and the oppressed in Venezuela, the hopes that their revolution has raised amongst workers and youth around the world.

Madrid, 23-11-04

komon

28th November 2004, 14:57

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 05:46 AM
Correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't Thomas Jefferson himself say that revolutions need to occur every 20 years? I will have to check up on that. If it is true, America is long overdue for another one. :ph34r:
yes he did but had in mind that each generation must learn again and again....
it seems that mankind is cursed to make the same mistakes again and again this world is getting a boring place.and a deadly one too.....nothing new .
mankind is a teenager who doesn't understand pain and history

Sabocat

29th November 2004, 16:00

I just read this on the Workers World site, and thought you might be interested in this article. Apparently, the U.S. is not going to sit quietly and respect the Venezuelan democratic process. Shocking.

Rebuffed in elections, contras turn to terror

By Berta Joubert-Ceci

Sheltered by darkness and cowardly tactics, unknown assassins placed 250 grams of the powerful plastic C-4 explosive under the car of Venezuelan prosecutor Danilo Anderson on the night of Nov. 18. The explosion killed him 15 minutes after he started to drive his vehicle.

Anderson, 38, was the principal figure working on several cases of violent crimes against Venezuela's Bolivarian Revolu tion, particularly the events surrounding the 2002 coup attempt against democratically elected President Hugo Chávez, who was kidnapped by the opposition.

Pedro Carmona, head of the business association FEDECAMARAS, had then been sworn in as president of Venezuela in the Miraflores Palace on April 12, 2002. That ceremony was attended by the leadership of the opposition, who came from the business and banking oligarchy, the military, the Catholic Church, leaders of the corrupt Venezuelan Workers Confed eration, and corporate media. Carmona then ordered the suspension of the National Assembly and the Constitution, among other counterrevolutionary rulings and actions. But an uprising of the people ended the coup and rescued Chávez.

Since then, the government has repaid that trust by directing much of the income from Venezuela's rich oil industry into hous ing, food and education for the people.

To bring those responsible for the coup to justice, Anderson in October had begun subpoenaing 400 of the people whose signatures appeared on that day's attendance book for the palace.

Anderson also brought charges against the former Caracas metropolitan mayor, Alfredo Peña, for conspiracy to commit homicide, based on testimonies of eight former metropolitan police now in prison. They are accused of shooting civilians during the April 11, 2002, counter-revolutionary actions in Puente Llaguno, where 20 people died and 87 were wounded. Peña and others in the police department leadership also face prosecution. They are now prohibited from leaving the country.

Anderson was also investigating the leaders of SÚMATE, the opposition organization that has worked to overthrow Chávez with funds from the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy (NED). He was working jointly with Luisa Ortega, another national prosecutor who was kidnapped but escaped, suffering injuries in the process. Several other cases stemming from counter-revolutionary actions were in the process of being taken to the courts as well.

Anderson also prosecuted the former mayor of Baruta, Henrique Capriles Radonski, because of his role in an attack on the Cuban Embassy during the April 2002 coup. The embassy had been surrounded by dozens of counter-revolutionaries who destroyed its vehicles and cut the water and electricity supply to the building, where women, children and men were inside.

Because of the gravity of all these cases and Anderson's resolve to bring justice in the name of the Venezuelan people, he had been threatened numerous times and even attacked in a shopping mall in Caracas.

U.S. tries to destabilize Venezuela

The assassination of Danilo Anderson is seen both in Venezuela and beyond as an escalation of Washington's plan to destabilize the Bolivarian Revolution. It is felt that the opposition and their U.S. masters are desperate. The elections have decisively gone against them. Chávez was reaffirmed as president in an August referendum; supporters of the Bolivarian Revolution swept the national and local elections in October.

Also fueling the opposition's desperation is Chávez's popularity among the masses worldwide, but particularly in Latin America, where U.S. plans for "free trade" agreements are finding growing resistance. Conversely, trade and aid agreements between Venezuela and other countries of Latin America, Africa and Asia are a great worry to the U.S., whose dollar and exports are declining.

The Venezuelan oligarchy is not working alone, as the NED and other U.S. funding agencies fuel money and resources ONLY to the opposition. It is a sign of danger for the Revolution.

This murder comes on the heels of other violent actions and attempts--like the discovery that a farm owned by a Cuban-Spaniard in the municipality of Baruta, near Caracas, was being used to train 100 Colombian paramilitaries to assassinate President Chávez.

The not-so-invisible hand of the U.S. government and the connection among Colombian paramilitaries, right-wing Cuban exiles and the Venezuelan opposition has been exposed both by Venezuelan government officials and analysts and intellectuals outside the country.

Vice President José Vicente Rangel has demanded an explanation from the U.S. for allowing death threats against Chávez and the training of terrorists on U.S. soil, particularly in Florida. He mentioned as an example the call for attempts against the life of President Chávez by actor Orlando Urdaneta during a Miami television program.

Venezuelan Communication Minister Andrés Izarra also denounced the terrorist camp F-4 Commands, headquartered in Miami, where the Venezuelan opposition is trained militarily with the support of the government of the U.S.

But the clearest proof comes directly from U.S. government officials. For example, Bush's national security adviser, Condo leezza Rice, recently said that Chávez is "a real problem," adding that "the key there is to mobilize the region to both watch him and be vigilant about him and to pressure him when he makes moves in one direction or another. We can't do it alone."

The people of Venezuela, together with their president, are defending and deepening their revolution. The active support of the international movement, especially in the U.S., is also needed to defend Venezuela from imperialist attack.

Reprinted from the Dec. 2, 2004, issue of Workers World newspaper
This article is copyright under a Creative Commons License.

Link (http://www.workers.org/ww/2004/venezuela1202.php)

KrazyRabidSheep

4th December 2004, 00:21

Documents Show CIA Knew of Venezuela Coup

Fri Dec 3,11:26 AM ET

By CHRISTOPHER TOOTHAKER, Associated Press Writer

CARACAS, Venezuela - The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (news - web sites) knew dissident military officers were planning a coup in 2002 against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, according to purported U.S. intelligence documents posted on the Internet.

Citing the documents, Chavez lashed out at U.S. officials on Thursday, saying they knew a coup was brewing but failed to tip off Venezuela's government.

"The CIA (news - web sites) knew that a coup was coming ... the government of George Bush (news - web sites) knew," said Chavez, whose so-called "peaceful revolution" for the poor and close ties to Cuban leader Fidel Castro (news - web sites) have often put him at odds with U.S. policies.

The apparent declassified CIA documents are posted on the pro-Chavez Web site www.venezuelafoia.info, which contains links to other requests for U.S. documents by freelance investigative reporter Jeremy Bigwood.

An April 6 senior intelligence executive brief — just five days before a coup that briefly ousted Chavez — said "disgruntled senior officers and a group of radical junior officers are stepping up efforts to organize a coup against President Chavez, possibly as early as this month."

As early as March 11, another brief noted "increased signs that Venezuelan business leaders and military officers are becoming dissatisfied with President Chavez" and said if the situation were to further deteriorate "the military may move to overthrow him."

The authenticity of the documents could not be immediately confirmed, though the scanned briefs, with certain portions whited out, appeared to be formerly top secret documents that are regularly circulated among top officials in the Bush administration.

A 2002 State Department review of U.S. policy, however, said the U.S. government did warn Chavez of impending plots.

In his speech broadcast on state-run television Thursday, Chavez said documents showing U.S. involvement in the coup "are emerging" and "will continue to surface."

"Having a government of this type in the United States is a threat to the world," added Chavez, who accused the Bush administration of actively supporting the short-lived coup.

U.S. officials have repeatedly denied U.S. involvement in the coup of April 11, 2002, which was spurred by the killing of 19 people during a massive opposition-led protest.

Loyalists in the military returned Chavez to power after interim president Pedro Carmona dissolved the constitution and vowed to hold elections within a year.

Relations between Caracas and Washington have been strained in recent years, but diplomats from both nations have made efforts to improve ties.

William Brownsfield, U.S. ambassador to Venezuela, said differences between the two countries can be resolved, according to a report published by the Venezuelan newspaper El Universal on Thursday.

The newspaper also said he rejected allegations that U.S. officials backed Venezuelan coup leaders or endorsed Carmona's interim government, saying Washington considers the events in April 2002 "a closed chapter."

"We are willing to work with the Venezuelan government to improve relations," Brownfield was quoted as saying.

The State Department in July 2002 released a review of its policy and the U.S. Embassy's actions in Venezuela from November 2001 to April 2002, in which it confirms knowledge of plots to oust Chavez.

But it says that "far from working to foment his overthrow, the United States alerted President Chavez to coup plots and warned him of an assassination threat that was deemed to be credible."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a...nezuela_us_coup (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041203/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_us_coup)

Commie Rat

7th December 2004, 09:58

sorry im way out on the news but have the rebles taken control of Caracas yet i heard some sensationaist reports about gun battles in the city not long ago

redstar2000

10th December 2004, 14:00

President Chavez Frias studying Trotsky, Revolution and Emancipation

University of Los Andes (ULA) professor Franz J. T. Lee writes: As we reported, a while ago, in Moscow, President Hugo Chavez Frias bought Trotsky's famous work "The Permanent Revolution" and is currently eagerly studying its historic application and relevance. Apart from the well-known theory of global permanent revolution of Trotsky ... the establishment of socialism on a world scale, and not the Stalinist version of socialism in one bloc, country or island ... what should interest Venezuela in particular at this moment are Trotsky's views concerning the social relation between "violence" and "emancipation" in the "Third World," in Latin America.

More...

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=23907

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

h&s

11th December 2004, 09:31

I bet he's just got the news out that he's reading Trotsky to appease the real revolutionaries out there that he will do something for them. I doubt he will do anything remotly communistic though.
Or maybe this ws made up by the opposition to discredit Chavez?

chebol

11th December 2004, 15:34

Just some quick points (made at 3 in the morning, so apologies for rambling):

It's not an opposition trick- it was reported in venezuelanalysis.com.

Chavez has long been familiar with Marxism, having taught it as part of the curriculum at Military College, although whether that extended to Trotsky can't be known. What is known is that he publicly denied being a Marxist, saying that this is not a period of international proletarian revolution (or words to that effect). Now, however, he is saying that if Bolivar were alive today, he would be a socialist. How to explain?

Firstly, Chavez wasn't declaring himself a Trotskyist. He was highlighting the importance of the internationalist nature of the revolution, and agreeing that this is a necessary part of a successful socialist revolution. That is- socialism is not posssible in one country. He is not, however, coming out in favour of Trotsky's Theory of Permanent Revolution, at least not as it is applied by various sects to deny the national democratic stage in backwards capitalist countries, and demand immediate nationalisation regardless of reality. In fact, the situation on the ground in Venezuela is a clear example of Lenin's uninterrupted revolution (as Lenin meant it), and if we wait around for Chavez to declare the permanent revolution, we'll miss the boat.

I think it is much more important to look at Chavez's relationship with Castro and Cuba in assertaining his political motivation (he recently described Castro as the most important leader in Latin America, and once said that he didn't know if he felt of Fidel as a brother or a father), than to Trotsky. The Cuban revolution has long been outspokenly international in it's perspective, and has been a key support in this revolutionary period. The Marxist-Leninist nature of the Cuban revolution will no doubt be an aid to the Bolivarian revolution as it deepens, and I think Chavez was more making a point of the non-Stalinist and internationalist nature of this revolution, rather than it's "Trotskyism".

I don't think the organised Marxists (let alone Trotskyists) in Venezuela are of enough stature to make Chavez want to endanger the revolution by casually spouting references specific to Trotsky and his writings. Therefore, I wonder whether it's a bit early to start making socialist noises- there are still anti-imperialist tasks to be solved and the working class consciousness and organisational capacity are still being developed. It's very hard to tell without being there, however.

Most importantly, however, I think Chavez is signalling a deepening of his own radicalisation, and the direction the revolution is taking and what measures may well be on the cards as the process itself deepens.

I think perhaps we learn the wisdom of Jose Marti's famous 1895 letter to Manuel Mercado, whose first paragraph reads:

"My dearest brother: Now I can write, now I can tell you how tenderly and gratefully and respectfully I love you and that home which I consider my pride and responsibility. I am in daily danger of giving my life for my country and duty for I understand that duty and have the courage to carry it out-the duty of preventing the United States from spreading through the Antilles as Cuba gains its independence, and from empowering with that additional strength our lands of America. All I have done so far, and all I will do, is for this purpose. I have had to work quietly and somewhat indirectly, because to achieve certain objectives, they must be kept under cover; to proclaim them for what they are would raise such difficulties that the objectives could not be attained."

Ricardo P.

20th December 2004, 01:11

Washington tries to frustrate Russo-Venezuelan military alliance
12/14/2004 11:03
Caracas is expected to replace old US and European combat aircrafts by 50 new Russian MIG-29SMT Fulcrum

During a visit to Moscow in late November, Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez announced his country was planning to modernize its Armed Forces by replacing old European / US equipment with sophisticated hi-tech Russian weaponry. "We are modernising and strengthening our armed forces against any form of aggression. We are talking about deliveries of 100,000 Russian machineguns," Chavez told a news conference at that time.

However, it became known later that the operation is far more ambitious than expected. According to the Brazilian newspaper O Estado de Sao Paulo, Chavez is ready to buy up to 50 new Russian MIG-29SMT Fulcrum combat aircrafts, 40 Mi-35 helicopters and 100,000 AK-47 assault rifles in an operation estimated in $8 billion.

According to the Brazilian daily, the strengthening of the Venezuelan army has created concern among top Washington diplomats and its closest ally in South America, the right-wing Colombian administration of President Alvaro Uribe. Colombia and Venezuela share a 2,200 km border plenty of low scale incidents as it is a ground for the actions of Colombian irregular forces.

Quoting sources at the US intelligence services, O Estado de Sao Paulo says Venezuela is also building a radar network all along its border with equipment provided by Ukraine and China. Despite earlier speculations, Brazil, the southern neighbour of Venezuela is not concerned on these developments. "We see the operation as an internal affair of a friendly nation", O Estado de Sao Paulo quoted Brazil"s vice-President, Jose Alencar as saying.

However, the local press speculated about a rising concern among other South American nations ahead of a military escalate in the region. A day after Mr. Chavez made his statement in Moscow, the Colombian congressman Carlos Julio Gonzalez in charge of the Defense commission said he would call for a special session to discuss the modernization of the Venezuelan Army. "We are concerned on the operation as it is not only a tactical plan, but also part of an offensive programme in view of the quantity and the quality of the equipment", he said.

Also quoting US sources, O Estado de Sao Paulo said Washington would "closely follow the operation", as per declared by the communications director of the US National Security Council, Sean McCormack. Even the incumbent US State Secreatry for Latin America, Roger Noriega, had something to say about that: "I think that Venezuela's bordering nations may have something to say about Chavez's decision to purchase combat aircrafts to Russia".

Noriega's statement came as green light for US allies in South America to challenge the operation and points out directly to Bogota. Colombia hosts the US second largest embassy in the world, only behind Washington's diplomatic representation in Baghdad. Since 2000, the United States has provided Bogota with $3.3 billion in mostly military assistance, and President Bush promised more when he visited Colombia on Nov. 22. It is, indeed, Latin America's main destiny of US military aid.

It is not possible to even think about an armed conflict between Colombia and Venezuela at this time. But, with Colombia being permanently aided by Washington is normal that Venezuelans believe they need to balance the military power of its neighbour.

Always according to US sources, Venezuela's military counts with 56,000 officers, split as follows: 34,000 belong to the Army, 15,000 to the Navy and 7,000 to the Air Force. Peru and Venezuela are the only countries in the region operating new combat aircrafts.

Hernan Etchaleco

Pravda.Ru

http://english.pravda.ru/world/20/91/368/1..._venezuela.html (http://english.pravda.ru/world/20/91/368/14715_venezuela.html)

fuerzasocialista

24th December 2004, 01:33

I'm glad to hear that Venezuela is taking the initiative to modernize it's army in the face of US imperialism and the constant threat Colombia represents with it's aide from Washington. I dare to think that not only is this strengthening in response to growing tensions with Colombia, but should the US try anything with Cuba, Venezuela will be right there to back up the Cuban troops. Its good to see that at least one other Latin American president isn't a coward when it comes to standing upto the US.

Viva La Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela!!!

redstar2000

30th December 2004, 12:58

Venezuela and Israel

During 2004, economic investment between Israel and Venezuela has increased considerably, according to Israeli Ambassador to Venezuela, Sholmo Cohen speaking after meeting with Executive Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel to talk about proper mechanisms to improve cooperation and friendly ties between both nations.

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=24104

Magic Formulas

President Hugo Chavez Frias says that he believes freedom, equality, fraternity and love are sublime principles and the magic formula which must exist around the world to eradicate famine, misery and inequality.

http://emailaccount.mail.everyone.net/emai...044129331552576 (http://emailaccount.mail.everyone.net/email/scripts/view.pl?EV1=11044129331552576)

Trans-historic creations

Within this historical context, the Bolivarian Revolution came into being, is living, staying alive.

Surely, it is original, authentic and new, is being created by Latin American anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist forces, but it is also the trans-historic creation of all previous, global, social revolutions, and is the vanguard of coming, international emancipatory struggles.

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=24099

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

1949

10th January 2005, 18:13

Decrees Passed to Accelerate Land Reform in Several Venezuelan States
By Gregory Wilpert – Venezuelanalysis.com
Thursday, 06 January 2005
Caracas, January 4, 2005—Several state governors of Venezuela have either recently passed or are in the process of drafting decrees to accelerate the country's land reform process. The decrees are meant to eliminate large landed estates (latifundios) and to clarify ownership and usage of agricultural land in Venezuela.

In late 2001 the Chavez government had passed a controversial land reform law, which was aimed at redistributing land holdings of over 100 to 5,000 hectares (250-12,500 acres), depending on its quality, to landless peasants. So far the government has redistributed state-owned land to over 130,000 peasant families, of about 10 hectares (25 acres) each. Except for disputes over which land belongs to the state and which to private landowners, no privately owned land has yet been officially redistributed.

Venezuela's land reform law specifies that large landed estates, especially if they are not being cultivated, are to be redistributed. In response to the decrees being passed in several states, Venezuela's Vice-President, José Vicente Rangel, said, "The struggle against the latifundio makes social and economic sense, which is why it is of the highest interest to the state." The Chavez government hopes to increase both social justice and "food sovereignty" via the land reform program. Venezuela currently imports 60-70 of its food stuffs and agricultural production makes up merely 6% of the country's GDP.

In Cojedes state, in Venezuela's North West, the recently reelected pro-Chavez governor Jhonny Yánez Rangel, passed a decree that called for the "intervention" of uncultivated private land. The decree does not specify what it means by intervention, but says that the state government will intervene in "all lands, urban and rural land, public and private, that presumably is uncultivated or classified as part of the latifundio regime..."

Other pro-Chavez state governors, such as in Monagas, Yaracuy, Apure, Barinas, and Portugesa, have either passed similar decrees or are in the process of drafting them. While they vary in how they would be applied, they all involve the creation of technical commissions for identifying and redistributing the land.

Meanwhile, Vice-President Rangel has convened a special meeting to coordinate the efforts taking place in the different states. Also involved in this meeting was Eliecer Otaiza, the director of the National Land Institute (INTI), which is responsible for the land reform. Otaiza said that his institute recently conducted a study and now estimates that there are about 500 estates with uncultivated agricultural land, of which 56 would be classified as latifundios, the large landed estates that used to dominate Latin American societies. In Venezuela latifundios are defined as estates of over 20,000 hectares (50,000 acres). "We hope to issue 100,000 land grants within the next six months," said Otaiza.

Land owners whose land is expropriated under the 2001 Land Law would receive market value compensation. Despite this, opposition leaders have criticized the law as being "communist" and as a violation of private property rights.

link (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/content/view/144/43/)

----

Havana. January 7, 2005

Venezuelan government to hand over 90,000 homes this year

CARACAS.—Venezuela’s Ministry of Housing and Habitat has promised to hand over 90,000 houses in 2005 as part of an official plan to reactivate uncompleted projects and develop new ones.

Housing Minister Julio Montes, quoted this Thursday by the Venpres news agency, stated that they hope to complete 49,000 homes and build a further 40,000.

Montes stated that in order to make the works more efficient they intend to change the systems, workforce and contract practices in the sector and will be convening a large social movement.

He noted that they are designing the mechanisms to be used for acquiring land to urbanize and that details on the scheme to be applied will be announced next week.

The minister affirmed that the housing projects include schools, basic services and others such as telephones, Internet connections and alternative communication. (AIN)

link (http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2005/enero/vier7/03viviend.html)

Break the Chains

14th January 2005, 05:02

I wonder how long the revolution will last.

http://www.ezln.org/fotos/raul_ortega/08.jpg

seraphim

14th January 2005, 08:42

There are some among us who are more than willing to get directly involved in Venezuela's fight for reform.

1949

15th January 2005, 01:57

Chavez announces “war against the latifundia”

By Jorge Martín - www.marxist.com
Tuesday, 11 January 2005

http://www.minci.gov.ve/imagnot/001.jpg

At a mass rally of 10,000 people on Monday January 10, Venezuela's president Hugo Chavez announced a new decree aimed at speeding up land reform. He was speaking in front of a massive banner with the slogan of 19th century peasant war leader Ezequiel Zamora "Free land and men - War against the latifundia". This comes after the Christmas period, during which a number of regional governors, elected in the October 31st elections, passed regional decrees along the same lines.

Since the Land Act was passed in December 2001, the National Land Institute has already distributed 5.5 million acres of land (2.2 million hectares) to peasant cooperatives. But up until now all the land distributed has been state-owned land and there have been no expropriations. The new decree, called Decreto Zamorano, and passed on the anniversary of the death of Ezequiel Zamora, is aimed at the large landed estates (latifundia) that have been left idle or are poorly used. But even so, the Decree is not based on expropriation of private land. A special land commission has been appointed to look into the issue of land ownership and usage. This commission will then issue reports on the following two aspects. The first is whether large landed estates which are privately used actually have proper land titles. In Venezuela, over the years, there have been many cases of private landowners occupying land that belongs to the state and de facto appropriating it. The other issue will be whether the land is being used or is being left idle. If landed estates are found not to be productive, then they can be seized (with compensation) and distributed to peasant cooperatives. Chavez has made it clear, both now and during the October 31st regional election campaign, that his preferred option is to solve this through negotiation with the land owners (in which they can give up land they do not use), but also that if no agreement is reached, the full strength of the law and of the army will be used to implement land reform.

On the face of it, this is in fact quite a moderate decree and in its wording is far from a wide-ranging threat to private property, as has been presented by the Western media. The Financial Times for instance has talked of "what is likely to be a number of Zimbabwe-style expropriations of big estates", when referring to the intervention at the El Charcote estate. The FT chose to describe this move, which took place on Saturday January 8th, as "seizure", when in reality what happened is something else completely. The El Charcote estate is owned by AgroFlora, a subsidiary of the British Vestey Group. The Vestey group, belonging to the family of Lord Vestey is a major meat and food multinational which has been operating in South America for decades.

The El Charcote estate has 13,000 hectares (32,000 acres) of land and produces some 450,000 kilos of beef every year. The Venezuelan government argues that a large part of this land is not actually owned by the Vestey group and that they are illegally using property belonging to the Venezuelan state. Local peasant leaders argue that the land was bought by dictator Juan Vicente Gomez in the 1930s and that subsequently, all land owned by the dictator was passed over to the Venezuelan state. Vestey Group administrators complain that parts of the ranch have been occupied by peasants since 2001 when the Land Act was passed. The intervention at the El Charcote estate was carried out by the governor of Cojedes, Johnny Yánez, with about 200 national guardsmen and police along with helicopters which will allow them to survey the ranch.

http://www.eluniversal.com/2005/01/09/09118a1.jpg

As part of a regional review of land ownership the Cojedes regional governor sent a commission of enquiry to El Charcote. The ranch has not been "seized", as the Financial Times claims, but rather there has been an "intervention". There is now a technical team on the ranch which will investigate the claims of the British group over the land titles and whether the land is being used to its full capacity or whether parts of the ranch have been left idle.

As Chavez explained in his speech on Monday, the structure of land ownership in Venezuela is scandalously unfair. A 1998 census found that 60 percent of Venezuelan farmland was owned by less than 1 percent of the population. Chavez yesterday said that nearly 80 percent of the country's land is owned by 5 percent of landowners. Meanwhile, the smallest landowners representing 75% of agricultural holdings have to share 6% of the land. The 1998 census also revealed that 90 percent of farmland given to the poor under a 1960 agrarian reform had since returned to large landholders. "A democracy that permits such a situation of injustice will lose its democratic character and will end up turning itself into a pantomime of democracy. A revolution that permits this injustice cannot call itself a revolution," said Chavez.

This is at the same time that Venezuela, despite having large extensions of very fertile land with a benign climate, imports about 60 to 70% of all the foodstuffs that it consumes. Some have called it a "harbours' agriculture", since most agricultural products come from ... the harbours through which they are imported. For instance, every quarter, 14,000 tonnes of black beans (caraotas) and other pulses, which are an important part of the staple diet of poor Venezuelans, are imported. Production of caraotas actually collapsed in the 1990s, from 31,376 tonnes in 1988 to 18,627 tonnes in 1999, while the Venezuelan population increased by 20%.

In fact, agriculture is one of the most extreme expressions of the backwardness and parasitical character of the Venezuelan oligarchy, this reactionary alliance between capitalists, bank owners, landowners and multinational corporations that has ruled the country since it achieved independence. For them it is preferable, and more profitable, to live off the state and oil resources, gamble on the stock exchange, buy government bonds, invest their money abroad, and import luxury goods, than it is to develop national production in any field.

In these conditions it is difficult to see how an amicable agreement can be reached with the landowners to voluntarily distribute land to the hundreds of thousands of land hungry families that need it. The struggle for the land has been one of the most contentious issues of the Venezuelan revolutionary process so far. It was the passing of the Land Act in December 2001 (together with the Hydrocarbon Act and others) that triggered the opposition to organise the April 2002 military coup against the Chavez government. The hopes of thousands of peasant communities were again lifted during the regional election campaign last October, when Chavez delivered belligerent speeches against the latifundio and instructed the Bolivarian gubernatorial candidates to tackle the problem of land reform straight away.

No meaningful land reform possible within the boundaries of private property

The president of the ranch owners association, Betancourt, reacted strongly to the decree, saying in an interview on the Globovision television station that "If they eliminate private property rights, they will also be eliminating the peace in Venezuela''. This is an ominous threat. Some 100 peasant leaders and activists have been killed in disputes over land property with big landowners in the past 4 years. In some areas along the border with Colombia ranch owners have for some time armed white guards modelling themselves on, and sometimes getting advice from, the infamous paramilitary gangs from neighbouring Colombia.

If you have a situation in which 5% of landowners control nearly 80% of the land, then it is clear that one cannot carry out a land reform policy that will please both the owners of large landed estates and landless peasants. Even the Cojedes governor, Johnny Yanéz, had to say that private property "is a right, but not an absolute one, since the collective interest, public need, and food security are parameters that must justify this private right".

This is not just about land. If the conflict over land reform deepens, as it is bound to do, and land is expropriated and given over to landless peasants, then workers in industry are bound to draw similar conclusions. Instances like that of the Venepal paper mill, which the owners declared bankrupt and the workers took over and are now demanding to be nationalised under workers control, will spread. On the other hand, Venezuela's landowners are an inseparable part of the Venezuelan ruling class. An attack on them will be rightly seen by the capitalists as an attack on the very principle of private property of the economy.

The analysts of the ruling class can clearly see the implications of these moves. According to business analysts Bloomberg, Benito Berber, an analyst with HSBC Securities in New York said: "The erosion of private property rights may undermine long- term economic growth as capital inflows slow and investors lose confidence in the country's future".

http://www.rnv.gov.ve/noticias/uploads/200/post-2-11053946282.jpg

The problem is precisely that, as in other areas of the progressive government of Chavez, any social justice measures implemented, no matter how "moderate" they might be, clash head on with the vested interests of the owners of industry, capital and the land. We must remember that, even though the Bolivarian revolution has not directly infringed on the rights of private property, the capitalists and landowners have attempted the violent overthrow of the government on several occasions. The fact is that the basic needs of the working people of Venezuela (to free health care and education for all, to a roof over their heads, to decent food on their table, to means of earning their livelihood) are in direct contradiction to the existence of the capitalist system based on private profit and the benefits of a wealthy minority. And this is why the very existence of a revolutionary movement in Venezuela is seen by the oligarchy, rightly, as a threat to their interests.

The Bolivarian revolution should understand this basic fact and move to wrest from the oligarchy the levers of economic and political power they still control as the only guarantee for the victory of the revolution.

January 11, 2005

link (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/content/view/148/43/)

----

Financial Times attacks Venezuelan land reform: The FT's demagogy in favour of ... workers' rights?!

By Jorge Martin - handsoffvenezuela.org
Friday, 14 January 2005

As was to be predicted, London's Financial Times reacted negatively to Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez's announcement of a speeding up of land reform (see: Chavez announces “war against the latifundia” (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/content/view/148/43/)). On January 13th they published an editorial comment (see: Chávez slips into demagogy again (http://news.ft.com/cms/s/e27f7e78-6507-11d9-9f8b-00000e2511c8.html)) full of distortions of the truth and pontificating advice. We did not expect less from the FT, a paper that has always unashamedly defended the interests of capital. However, what we did not expect was for the FT to argue that the "best way to address rural poverty", was for businesses to "pay decent wages and guarantee good working conditions for its workers"!

The editorial piece contains a number of factual errors, which are introduced for the purpose of backing their argument against land reform. Let's look at those:

1) The FT says that "Land reform ... has been on the statute books for more than three years. But it is only now, ... that Mr Chávez is implementing it." This is plainly wrong. The National Land Institute has already distributed some 2.2 million hectares of land (approximately 5.5 million acres) to peasant cooperatives in the last three years.

2) The FT further says: "First, the government itself is the biggest landowner in Venezuela and has huge amounts of empty land that could be settled by the landless". This is correct, but what the FT does not tell us is that there has been no expropriation of privately owned land in Venezuela so far, so the 2.2 million hectares of land distributed have all been state owned land. The government is therefore, already distributing land it owns.

3) The FT then talks of "The expropriation of Vestey's Agroflora subsidiary is an inauspicious precedent since the government has so far failed to show that the estate was unproductive". Again, this is wrong, since Vestey's Agroflora ranch has NOT been expropriated. On Saturday, January 8th, there was an “intervention” by the Venezuelan authorities at the El Charcote ranch, belonging to Agroflora, precisely for the purpose of determining if the land titles are correct (since the government claims that at least a third of the land is state property) and if any parts of the estate have been left idle. The intervention entails a number of troops from the National Guard being present at the ranch carrying out the investigation, during which the ranch is allowed to operate normally. Despite the FT's correspondent Andy Webb-Vidal’s talk of the ranch being "seized", this is clearly not the case.

The Financial Times is obviously entitled to have its own editorial views on land reform in Venezuela, and we expected them to be on the side of the landowners. To resort to twisting the truth to fit their arguments is very poor journalism indeed. To do so three times in a 7 paragraph editorial is quite a lot. However, what is really hilarious is that the FT, in order to further their argument against land reform, end up advocating workers rights! The editorial piece in fact ends up by recommending that "ensuring these [agricultural] businesses pay decent wages and guarantee good working conditions for its workers would be the best way to address rural poverty." How nice of them to think of rural workers! Whose demagogy then? Chavez's or the FT's?

link (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/content/view/151/43/)

1949

15th January 2005, 21:12

Women and Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution

Saturday, Jan 15, 2005

By: Sarah Wagner — Venezuelanalysis.com

History of Venezuela’s Women’s Movement

With the fall of the dictatorship of Pérez Jimenez in 1958, Venezuela tentatively took its first steps towards the aperture of a fragile, exclusionary democracy. In practice, democracy proved to be a gender-exclusive phenomenon. Although the Constitution of 1960 declared that men and women were formally equal under the law, women who had been active in the struggle for democracy found themselves devoid of its privileges and marginalized from politics.

In the First Seminar for the Evaluation of Venezuelan Women in 1968, women assessed the achievements they had made since their enfranchisement in 1947, outlined their goals, and recognized that they had little chance of promoting gender-based social or legal reforms without creating a formal institution within government. As women began to organize in civil society, the partisan rivalry between the two dominant parties of the era, COPEI and AD, principally continued to cater to class interests, thus impeding the survival of groups that cut across class lines and thwarting the development of gender-based consciousness.
Beyond organizational obstacles, Venezuelan women were severely restricted by penal, civil, and labor laws. Up until the early 80s, married and cohabiting women were not allowed to manage their own affairs, make decisions for their children, work, own property, or sign official documents without spousal approval.

Efforts by Venezuelan feminists to organize a women’s movement and create institutional space to promote women’s rights coincided with increased international awareness and promotion of the feminist agenda. In 1967, the United Nations issued the Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Three years later the Program of Concerted International Action for the Advancement of Women was released. 1974 was declared International Women’s Year. Drawing on inspiration from these achievements, as well as from a series of international conferences sponsored by the United Nations in 1975, 1980, and 1985, known as the International Women’s Decade, feminists took advantage of this conducive international climate to thrust women’s issues into the public eye, influence government to draft policy recommendations directed to promoting women’s social, political, and economic equality, and gave birth to several women’s organizations, such as Circulos Femininos Populares. Despite these achievements, women’s groups continued to face significant obstacles, such as limited resources allocation and the threat of being swallowed up by partisan politics.

While the issue is clearly open to debate, there exists a significant causal interplay between the emergence of an active women’s movement in the early 1970s and the oil boom, which more than tripled fiscal revenue between 1972 and 1975. Although the primary focus of then President Carlos Andrés Pérez (1973-1978) was economic expansion, he also allotted considerable funding for the promotion of social welfare. As a result, the first state agency for women, Comisión Feminina Asesora de la Presidencia (COFEAPRE), was established in 1974.

These government initiatives were the catalyst in consolidating the women’s movement and in laying the foundation for those who would follow. Although COFEAPRE received little funding and was never allotted the status of a regular ministry, it provided a space to debate and promote women’s issues within the government and created an awareness of the importance of gender-based organizations.

The rise of the petroleum state and the rapidly growing economy also created jobs in the labor force, which women were called upon to fill. Amidst the increased access to education and professional opportunities, women united across class lines in what was to be known as the Strategy in Unity and Diversity, organized the first Venezuelan Congress of Women in 1974, and capitalized on their new found strength as a voting block to be catered to.

The Crumbling of “La Gran Venezuela”

When oil prices collapsed in the early 80s, President Perez’s economic development project of La Gran Venezuela crumbled as well. Revenue allocated to social services dried up and the raw divisions caused by social and economic inequality were exposed. In spite of limitations imposed by a lack of funding and no fulltime staff, the Ministry for the Participation for Women in Development, which had replaced COFEAPRE in 1978, succeeded in mobilizing women across class lines and the political spectrum, achieving in 1982, the reform of the civil code. The reform of the Civil Code improved women’s legal standing in Venezuela, but, as Professor Elisabeth Friedman notes, “the delicacy with which the reform was worded (instead of women’s equality, the stated intent was democracy in the family) …largely hid the controversial feminist agency behind the pretext of family rights.”

In 1985, the Coordinator of Women’s Non-Governmental Organizations (CONG), an umbrella organization which united 26 women’s groups, gave women a platform to advance women’s issues outside of the traditional scope of political parties. Within the next five years, the organization not only doubled but succeeded in uniting women from a spectrum of political parties, ethnicities, and classes. Perhaps the most significant achievement of the CONG was their contributions to the draft of the 1990 Reform of the Labor Law.

The women’s movement splintered along class lines in the early 1990s for two reasons. One might say that the first was an indirect product of the economic crisis. Between 1985 and 1986, petroleum prices fell by more than half; by the early 90s, they were halved again. The poverty rate in a country that was previously associated with having one of the highest and fastest growing GDPs in Latin America, increased by over 60%, from 17.7% in 1981 to 78% by 1997, and the World Bank declared Venezuela to have the greatest inequality in any Latin American country. In addition to the severe decline in the standard of living, women from the middle and working classes faced increasing financial hardships and had less time to participate in civil society. Secondly, the reform of the Labor Law, originally intended to legislate equality between men and women workers, was only partially approved. Provisions for domestic servants were not included in the reform, consequently uniting working class women with working class men in the fight for higher wages and workers rights.

This class-based discord within the women’s movement led to the formation of groups with narrow, exclusionary agendas such as human rights, abortion, or the environment. Between 1992 and 1998, feminists in bureaucracies took the predominant role in the fight for women’s rights and made respectable legislative headway, although societal norms remained largely unaltered. Carlos Andrés Pérez created the National Council for Women (CONAMU) in 1992, which was instrumental in pushing legislation. In 1993, the Law of Equal Opportunity for women, which created the National Institute for Women, was passed. In 1997, the Suffrage Law was passed, requiring that 30% of party candidates be women. Less than a year later, in 1998, the Law against Violence Against Women and the Family, an initiative that had been in the works since 1995, was approved.

“This Revolution has woken women up” —María del Mar Alvarez

The fight for women’s rights has taken on a new meaning within the Bolivarian Revolution. With the election of Hugo Chávez Frías in 1998, Venezuela is proposing a democracy based on participation, in which the rights of citizens are not defined as purely political but instead embark on encompassing social justice and equality. Most women look upon this revolution, dedicated to tearing down the formally rigid and exclusive “democracy”, as the beginning of a new phase in the fight for gender equality. The focus is on no longer fighting for legal rights and political power, but instead changing the complexion of society.

http://venezuelanalysis.com/images/2004/01/linda_loaiza_protest.jpg
Women demonstrating in support of Linda Loaiza, who had been kidnapped and raped in an upper middle class neighborhood.

In one of his first acts as president, Chávez called for a Constituent Assembly to draft a new Constitution that would serve as the catalyst to change the stagnant, exclusionary fabric of Venezuelan society. Thousands of women including, feminists, former guerrillas, housewives, professionals, and members of organizations such as Women for Venezuela and United Women Leaders formed the Constitutional Front of Women of the Fifth Republic Movement (FCMMVR), which educated and organized women to draft demands for the Constitution and to promote the candidacy of feminists to the Constitutional Assembly. With the approval of the new Constitution on December 15th, 1999, Venezuelan women achieved an unprecedented social and political victory, as well as one of the most advanced constitutions in the world.

Often referred to as the non-sexist Magna-Carta, the Venezuelan Constitution guarantees total social, political and economic rights to all citizens. It clearly states that women are entitled to full citizenship, and it addresses discrimination, sexual harassment, and domestic violence. In addition to guaranteeing full equality between men and women in employment, it is the only Constitution in Latin America that that recognizes housework as an economically productive activity, thus entitling housewives to social security benefits (Article 88). By allotting economic privileges to a job that was previously unrecognized as having an economic value, Venezuela is breaking down societal norms and capitalist ideology which exclusively associate value with producing revenue.

The president of the National Institute for Women, María León, notes, “Our Constitution enhances the struggle against discrimination of human beings, and because of this it includes mechanisms for the protection of all social groups,” and adds “Article 88 is an example to be followed by all countries in their struggle to eradicate discrimination against women.”

The Venezuelan Constitution (Article 76) also recognizes the sexual and reproductive rights of women and obliges the state to ensure that doctors provide accurate information about family planning. It acknowledges the social function of motherhood and guarantees healthcare to the mother, from the moment of conception and during post-partum. Article 75 states that family relations are based in equality of rights and duties, in solidarity, in mutual comprehension and in reciprocal respect.

María León emphasized that one of the greatest achievements of the women’s movement, and indeed for the entirety of society, was the incorporation of gender perspective and non-sexist language throughout the entirety of the Constitution. The Spanish language, just as most western languages (except English), distinguishes between the masculine and feminine versions of job titles, such as “presidente” and “presidenta.” Now, every time there is a reference to the president, a citizen, a lawyer, a representative, a minister, etc., the reference is in both the masculine and the feminine forms.

Recognizing that language is not neutral or innocent, that it transmits the ideology of society, and that a machista language perpetuates a machista culture, Venezuela has taken a step forward in eradicating this machismo which impedes full equality between men and women. It is necessary to attribute this importance to language, because if what we say is a reflection of how we think, then we will never change how we think or how we view gender relations in society without changing language. In other words, if we choose to continue to speak in a way that hides women, we will never fully take them into consideration as equals.
Oftentimes such commentaries are followed by reactions such as “but when I say niños I am referring to both boys and girls,” or “changing our language is not going to change the reality of women.” True, it is not going to change the reality of women overnight, but it is an important step. Instead of taking language or culture for granted, accepting them without reflection, the Bolivarian Constitution is changing how we speak about women, and thus how we view women, how we treat women and their position in society.

http://venezuelanalysis.com/images/2004/01/maria_del_mar_alvarez.jpg
Maria del Mar Alvarez, the National Defender of Women's Rights, speaking at a conference.

María del Mar Alvarez, the National Defender of Women’s Rights,[1] notes, “In this revolution women have participated extraordinarily. We have achieved a Constitution that is a model for the world for justice and equality. It has empowered them. Usually feminism caters to the upper and middle classes. However, this revolution has woken women up and feminism is reaching the popular sectors. Now all women know they have the right to participate”.

Progress has been made

Since the new Constitution went into effect, women have played key roles, both in government and NGOs, in drafting, advancing, and reforming a wide array of legislation in diverse fields, including but not limited to healthcare, education, the environment, land reforms, indigenous rights, and reproductive rights. Participation by women in civil society has been instrumental carrying out public campaigns to increase awareness of women’s issues and creating programs for women.

According to María León, the fight for women’s rights in Venezuela has taken on a new meaning within the Bolivarian Revolution. “We have a president who understands the problems of women. Chávez has supported this organization and its projects. He never stops speaking about the problems of women. For the first time, we are a social issue. The speeches of and meetings with Chávez are always filled with women, in fact more women than men. When our president speaks, he says Venezolanos y Venezolanas [Venezuelan men and Venezuelan women]. Women recognize him as their leader. One can see this because there are more women actively participating in this revolution than men.”

Mercedes Aguilar, part of the Executive Committee of INAMUJER, also emphasized the important role of women in this revolution. According to her, women have taken an active role, in some cases, more so than their male counterparts. The majority of people who participate in the missions, in the political and community activities are women.

Although women fully participate in politics, they are still underrepresented in leadership positions in government. In the past few years there has been a modest increment of women in government, for example 16 women were elected to the 131 member National Constitutional Assembly. However, in the highest positions there is still a noticeable and troubling gap between men and women. Initially Chávez did not appoint any women to his government. However, in 2000 he appointed a number of women to cabinet positions and other important posts.

The National Institute for Women

In 2000, Chávez converted CONAMU into the National Institute for Women (INAMUJER) by a presidential mandate, in accordance with the Law of Equal Opportunities for Women (article 44) and appointed María León, leading women’s rights activist, former guerrilla fighter, and the former director of CONAMU as the director. INAMUJER is currently in the process of educating women to defend the political rights that they has thus so far achieved and expanding on these rights in order to achieve a truly democratic society, not only politically, but also socially and culturally, in which men and women are valued as equals. “Feminism is reaching the popular sectors,” notes María del Mar Alvarez excitedly in her office. “Usually, feminism caters to the upper and middle class and does not reach the popular sectors. INAMUJER is striving to include marginalized women in the feminist discourse”.

In order to accomplish this, INAMUJER organizes educational campaigns on sexual and reproductive rights and prevention of violence against women, publishes articles and books and distributes these materials as well as copies of laws, such as the 1998 Law against Violence against Women. For example, in March of 2004, INAMUJER hosted a series of three workshops entitled, “The Human Rights of Women,” in which regional and non-governmental organizations from the states of Vargas, Miranda, Cojedes, Amazonas, Apure, Carabobo, Guárico, and from Caracas presented educational programs on human rights, sexual rights, reproductive rights as well as the rights elaborated in the Constitution and in international treaties. Previous workshops have focused on the nature of violence, the history of the women’s movement, and concepts such as gender and feminism.

http://venezuelanalysis.com/images/2004/01/domestic_violence_workshop.jpg
Women attending a domestic violence workshop organized by INAMUJER.

The organization has also set up a free telephone hotline for victims of domestic violence, as well as a shelter, Casa de Abrigo for women who fear for their lives. According to Mercedes Aguilar, INAMUJER “gives 24 workshops a year to teach women what their rights are and how to report domestic violence…We provide support and protection to women who have been victims of violence.” They are also executing programs to sensitize police officers, lawyers, and doctors to gender and domestic violence issues to ensure that women receive the support and services that they need.

In addition to educating women, INAMUJER also supervises and evaluates public policies directed towards women in order to assure the guarantee of equal opportunities and that the National Assembly uses a non-sexist language in legislation. They are currently involved in three campaigns. Together with a network of lawyers, social scientists, intellectuals and feminists, the organization is drafting reforms to laws that contradict the Constitution. For example, they are promoting the abolishment of the Penal Code and the drafting of another that incorporates a gender perspective and incorporates and ensures the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. Also, they are working to amend the Social Security law to ensure that housewives are able to collect their pensions as stipulated in Article 88 of the Constitution.

The second campaign focuses on achieving that 50% of the positions in the National Electoral Commission, the National Assembly, governorships, as well as other positions elected by popular vote are in hands of women. Currently “[o]nly 12% of the deputies in the National Assembly are women while in Spain it is an equal 50/50 ratio,” notes María del Mar Alvarez. The low percentage of women in the National Assembly is due to a reversal of the Women’s Suffrage Law of 1997, which had a required a 30% minimum. Feminists in Venezuela, both pro- and anti-Chavez, are very upset that Chavez allowed this to happen.

In their third campaign, INAMUJER is proposing to democratize the family in order to alleviate the double work day of women. María León notes, “The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela will only be an authentic democracy if we transform the home into a truly democratic unit.”[2]

The National Institute for Women recently celebrated its fifth birthday in which it presented the National Plan for Equality for Women 2004-2009, which is designed to prevent and eradicate violence against women, ensure women’s rights and access to justice, strengthen the participation of women in politics and society, and to develop and execute a plan for equal economic rights for women.

The ultimate goal of feminism is to change society

Despite these achievements, difficult battles lie ahead. Feminism in the Bolivarian Revolution faces three challenges. First, the Bolivarian Revolution has so far focused on power struggles between race and class. Although the feminist agenda has tentatively inserted itself in this debate, it is still struggling to achieve the same importance allotted to power relations between other groups.

Secondly, with the rise of “experts” in gender studies in academia and public institutions, as well as the introduction of a handful of highly visible women in political institutions, feminists have focused on legitimizing themselves before a capitalist and sexist world, and thus to an extent, lost touch with their popular bases. This struggle in turn must be placed within a larger context of social justice and equality and feminists build a space of interaction with various other social movements in order that the slogan “another world is possible” becomes a reality.

Thirdly, while many important laws were ratified in the 1990s, the challenge for the 21st century is to use these laws as the base to change society. The Venezuelan women’s movement recognizes that unless the mentality of society changes, it will be almost impossible to establish themselves on equal ground with men, legally, politically, and socially. Venezuela is one of the few Latin American countries that acknowledges violence and discrimination against women as impeding the evolution of a truly democratic society based on equality. However, despite this and despite the Labor Law (1997), the Law of Violence Against Women (1998), the Law for Equal Opportunities for Women (1999), and the Law of Micro financial System (2001), Venezuela has taken significant steps to eradicate discrimination legally, these problems continue to persist in society.

“We are amidst a profound social transformation in which discrimination, prejudices, and the injustices against women are coming to the forefront. This revolution has recognized women as human beings. But we still are unable to say that we have eradicated discrimination against women in society or even in the minds of women. Discrimination is a phenomenon that has existed for centuries and it is impossible to eradicate within five years. Our values do not change overnight. However, Venezuelan women now know that this is revolution is for them too and they are beginning to wake up,” says Nora Casteñeda, the president of the Woman’s Bank.

Under the government of Hugo Chávez, women have been instrumental in initiating legal and institutional reforms, have helped to draft a Constitution which creates the framework for a society based on social justice, and have made significant and rapid progress in creating NGOs, have increased their representation in politics, and have defended their democracy. In the participatory democracy of the Bolivarian Revolution, in which the rights of citizens are not defined as purely political but instead embark on encompassing social justice and gender equality, women have the potential to construct a new humane society which could not only change their reality but also set an example for the world in terms of gender equality.

----

[1] The job of the National Defender of Women’s Rights is to defend women against discrimination and inequality as well as to make sure that international laws and treaties are fulfilled and to establish inter-institutional relations.

[2] El Nacional 3-4-2000.

link (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1353)

Kez

20th January 2005, 17:25

Chavez Nationalises Venepal (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venepal_nationalised.htm)

Chavez nationalises Venepal under workers’ control
“We want to liberate ourselves from capitalism”
By Jorge Martin

Chavez talks to Venepal worker
after signing the decree.
Picture: Agencia Bolivariana de Noticias

On the morning of January 19th, in the Ayacucho room of the Presidential Palace in Caracas, and with the presence of Venepal workers and trade union leaders, Chavez signed decree number 3438 which expropriates Venepal. From now on it will be co-managed by the workers and the state.

This is a very important victory for the workers of Venepal but more than that it is a massive step forward for the Bolivarian revolution.

Venepal is one of the main producers of paper and cardboard in Venezuela and its plant is located in Morón, in the industrial state of Carabobo. At one point it employed a total of 1,600 workers, controlled 40% of the national market and was one of the main Latin American producers in this sector. But the company’s management allowed the paper mill to slowly lose market shares and revenues. In April 2002, at the time of the short lived military coup against Chávez, some of its main shareholders were present at the swearing in ceremony for the new, illegitimate, “president” Pedro Carmona. During the bosses’ lockout against the Chávez government in December 2002-January 2003 the workers resisted attempts by the employers to paralyse the plant.

In July 2003, the owners declared bankruptcy and the workers responded by occupying the plant and starting to run production under workers’ control. Rowan Jimenez, a trade union activist and member of the action committee, explained how during the occupation, “the workers organised production, broke all productivity records and reduced unproductive waste to a level never seen before”, (El Topo Obrero interview, 16/09/04). After a 77-day long struggle an uneasy truce was reached. But that was not to last. On September 7th of last year, the company again ceased operations and the workers’ struggle started again.

The Venepal paper mill.
Picture: CMR
From the outset of the struggle the workers adopted the demand for nationalisation under workers’ control that was being proposed by the comrades of the Revolutionary Marxist Current (The Workers’ Mole). There were a number of demonstrations in Moron and in Caracas, and solidarity actions were being organised by workers in other factories, particularly those organised by the Carabobo region of the newly established trade union federation, the UNT.

After months of struggle, finally, on January 13th, when a delegation of Venepal workers went to Caracas to demand a solution, the National Assembly declared Venepal and its installations to be of “public usefulness and social interest”. This was the prelude for Chavez signing decree no. 3438. This is the result of the struggle and the resilience of the workers in Venepal who consciously sought the support of the local community for their struggle.

In his speech at the signing ceremony, in front of a large number of Venepal workers and UNT trade union leaders, Chavez said “here we are creating a new model, and that is why in Washington they are angry... our model of development implies a change in the productive apparatus. The working class must be united, learn and participate”.

Edgar Peña, General Secretary SUTIP
Before Chavez, the oldest worker in Venepal took the stage and described their four month long struggle and the sacrifices they had had to make. Edgar Peña, general secretary of the Venepal workers’ union explained how the workers had drafted a project that proved the company could be profitable and how this paved the way for expropriation. Peña also asked for National Guard protection of the installations, since there are still those bent on sabotaging them. He also explained how, when they resume production in a few weeks’ time, the first products will be destined for the government’s social programmes (Misiones), “for the benefit of the working class”.

In his intervention, Chavez stated that capitalism is a model based on slavery, “and this is why in Washington they are angry, because we want to liberate ourselves from capitalism, in the same way that they were angry many years ago with the ideas of Libertador Simon Bolivar”.

Referring to Condoleeza Rice’s recent criticisms of Venezuela, he said that there are good remedies in the market to cure ulcers, “for those who might need it”. He added that some might be annoyed at what is happening in Venezuela, but “they will continue to be annoyed by the revolutionary process, because no one is going to dislodge us from it”.

Chavez added that the “role of the workers in this model is fundamental and this is the difference between this model and the capitalist model”. He emphasised that “it is necessary to change the productive relations”.

Adressing Venepal workers
Picture: Agencia Bolivariana de Noticias

“Capitalism wants to annihilate the workers... here we are carrying out a process of liberation of the workers, and this is why they are annoyed in Washington”.

Paraphrasing Lenin, Chavez said, “neoliberal capitalism is the highest stage of capitalist madness.”

“In Venezuela we are at war, but not invading other countries or violating other countries’ sovereignty... here we are at war against misery and poverty”.

He explained that the recovery of factories on the part of the state is aimed at changing the conditions of exploitation the workers have been submitted to by the capitalist model and the recovery of the country’s industrial capacity. He added that these new companies should not be viewed through the lens of state capitalism, but rather as co-management. “We must not fear the workers since they are the soul of the companies”.

Chavez also announced the “recovery” of a maize processing plant and all of the basic industries in Guyana (this means the massive SIDOR steelworks amongst others).

Though he said that “today’s expropriation of Venepal is an exceptional measure... we are not going to take away land, if it is yours it is yours”, he was also clear that “any factories closed or abandoned, we are going to take them over. All of them.”

“I invite the workers’ leaders to follow on this path” he said. This is a clear appeal to workers in other factories who were also involved in the struggle of the occupied factories in July-August 2003, like the CNV, Fenix, Industrial de Perfumes, CODIMA, among others. Workers in these factories have already started to remobilise.

This is without doubt a massive step forward in the right direction. But it must also be extended to all those other sectors of the economy that are under monopoly and imperialist control. This should include the banking system (which is largely in the hands of the two Spanish multinationals), the telecoms sector (in the hands of US multinationals), the food distribution sector (in the hands of a couple of Venezuelan companies owned by known coup organisers), and others. This needs to be done, as in the case of Venepal, under workers’ control. In this way the whole economy could be planned to the benefit of the majority of working people. This would be the only way of guaranteeing the final victory of the revolution. Workers’ control or management, if it remains isolated in one single company, cannot, in the longer term, fundamentally solve the problem.

Through its own experience, the Bolivarian revolution has come up against the wall of capitalism. Now it needs to break it down and move to a democratically planned socialist economy in order to win the war against poverty and misery.

Daymare17

21st January 2005, 10:01

This is great. The state is actually supporting workers' control. I don't think there's any precedent since the Russian Revolution, or at least since the Hungarian Revolution of 1918.

Does everyone realise what this means?!?

It's SOCIALISM IN PRACTICE PEOPLE! Even if only in embryo.

SOCIALISM IN PRACTICE! NO KIDDING!

redstar2000

26th January 2005, 15:10

The initial phase of Operation Condoleezza is in full swing

* A most dangerous strategy is being activated against the government of Hugo Chavez, being this time its management completely assumed by the US State Department.

* A vast number of fellow-citizens already involved and still to be committed exist.

* The blow is rooted in Plan Colombia of which president Uribe is nothing else but an instrument.

* The kidnapping of Rodrigo Granda is only the beginning of an offensive that shall sustain itself upon a matrix of opinion that links the mandatories Chavez and Castro with the heads of narcotraffic.

* Ante-room of a military intervention.

Full Text (http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=24600)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

bolshevik butcher

28th January 2005, 13:11

Socilaism in practise all right, but for how long, do you really think the U$ will let this go, if Chavez is successful.

fuktheworld

28th January 2005, 20:04

Communists, Anarchists, and political cynics alike. At this day in age, it is imparitive that we do not quarrel, our nubers are quickly decreasing, and so is our power. In order to attain the dream of our former comrades we must ban together and strive for our common goal. Do not bring your idealists fantisies along, leave them be, for the world in which we live in is an imperfect one, and if we fight for perfection then we will be fighting for nothing. There are steps we must meticulously follow to bring about social and political change. I do not ask for you to follow me but respond if you are ready to make a difference.

bolshevik butcher

28th January 2005, 21:34

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 08:04 PM
Communists, Anarchists, and political cynics alike. At this day in age, it is imparitive that we do not quarrel, our nubers are quickly decreasing, and so is our power. In order to attain the dream of our former comrades we must ban together and strive for our common goal. Do not bring your idealists fantisies along, leave them be, for the world in which we live in is an imperfect one, and if we fight for perfection then we will be fighting for nothing. There are steps we must meticulously follow to bring about social and political change. I do not ask for you to follow me but respond if you are ready to make a difference.
Are you gonna post this on every thread?

Guest1

4th February 2005, 03:53

The only way now to defend the gains the revolution has made is to push forward and begin dismantling the bureaucracy in favour of the workers' circles, and push forward the agenda of workers' control and further collectivization.

The longer the bourgeoisie maintains control over the important levers in Venezuela, the longer Venezuela is in danger of crippling counter-revolution. They will not stop, so they must be defeated conclusively.

Louis Pio

9th February 2005, 21:10

Hey I've been away for a long time (my internet connection is closed because of a severe lack of money), but I just thougt I would reply on this one.

I think the nationalisation of Venepal under workers control is a extremely important step forward. In the past discussions about Venezuela some members of this board has expressed a vacilliationist aproach to what is going on. Now we actually see a big step in the right direction in Venezuela. Of course things can still go the other way, which is why it is extremely important for the workers in Venezuela to organise as a class instead of only being a part of the broader movement. But as it is now this is exactly what is happening! Of course theres is alot of flaws in the current goventment, but it is clear that it is moving in the right diretion.

Btw I think that the people saying that we can't do anything because of the interference of USA has failed to analyse the situation. Instead they let themselves be fooled by the media. As it is now the US is stretched alot and they will have alot of problems intervining with direct military assistance. Also what these people in fact says is that we can never change anything because USA is too powerfull. So why do you at all bother to discuss politics if you think nothing can be changed?

Daymare17

12th February 2005, 17:06

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 28 2005, 01:11 PM
Socilaism in practise all right, but for how long, do you really think the U$ will let this go, if Chavez is successful.
You are burying the revolution while it's still alive. I thought you were a revolutionary. Instead you act like a whipped slave who pees his pants thinking about offending his master. A revolution obviously means fighting against the oppressor. If the US wouldn't attack every progressive government there would hardly be any reason for making a revolution in the first place. And besides the US will probably not intervene for the reasons Teis pointed out.

paladin_illuminatus

15th February 2005, 19:14

Even if the US does not let go for long it will be a good symbol for us to show the world that still many care and we are able to create new beginnigs. Venezuela may become hope and source of strength for all who wait for a sign to revolt.

bunk

23rd March 2005, 15:21

Venezuela 'seizes' British ranch

Chavez has promised a 'war' over large estates
Venezuela has declared a huge British-owned cattle ranch to be state property and handed out permits for local farmers to take over the land.
The agriculture minister held a ceremony at El Charcote ranch, saying it was officially under state control.

The state governor said 140 permits had been handed out so poor families could start work on the 32,000-acre estate.

Agroflora, the local subsidiary of British owner Vestey Group, said it would appeal against the seizure.

The firm's employees are still working on the land.

The group has operated the ranch, in central Cojedes state, for decades.

But officials said as property documents did not prove the land belonged to the group, it therefore belonged to the state.

No compensation

The government is taking action against what it calls latifundios, or large rural estates, which it says are lying idle.

Vestey denies the land is idle, and says it has complied fully with Venezuelan law.

The firm has been given two months to appeal.

It says it has documents proving the ownership of the land back to 1830.

The company also says the farm, which employs 300 workers, provides meat solely for the Venezuelan market.

'War to the death'

There is no compensation on offer for lands which are deemed to belong to the state.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez says many large farms were illegally acquired.

If ownership cannot be proved by documents dating back to 1830, the land is liable to be seized.

Mr Chavez has vowed to push ahead with a "war to the death against large landed estates, regardless of who the alleged landholders are".

The National Lands Institute has taken steps towards seizing 1.48m acres already this year, it says.

Scottish_Militant

3rd April 2005, 05:47

http://www.marxist.com/images/venezuela/venezuelabookcover2.jpg

The Venezuelan Revolution - a Marxist perspective (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venezuela_revolution_book.htm)

New book from Wellred!

BlastedEmpire

24th April 2005, 01:55

I strongly admire Hugo Chavez. He's a smart and extremely cultural man with a vision for his country. [I recommend reading Richard Gott's book "In the Shadow of the Liberator".]
I believe that in an ideal situation - no pressure from the US, no american dollars funding gigantic oppositon campaings, etc. - he could very well build up in Venezuela the closest thing to a perfect democratic and socialist system. The reason why I followed Venezuela's case close is because I retain a certain ammount of doubt as to whether or not true socialism is possible through democracy. It has been a positive experience so far. He won the referendum, which was great. It's a hard process and one that we should all support.

NovelGentry

24th April 2005, 02:45

no pressure from the US, no american dollars funding gigantic oppositon campaings, etc.

This has probably been mentioned in this thread before, but there is a great campaign founded around this called Hands Off Venezuela. They have a good number of resources to help make people conscious of the situation: http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/

I've talked to a fair amount of people about the situation who caught one of the leaflets posted in the back window of my car.

BlastedEmpire

24th April 2005, 13:14

thanks for the link, NovelGentry, I didn't know about it! :rolleyes:

encephalon

30th April 2005, 10:19

I thought this article was somewhat relevant:

Venezuelan President Says He Will Not Return to U.S. Until Americans "liberate" Their Nation (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0429-11.htm)
by Andrea Rodriguez

HAVANA - Declaring that U.S. citizens are oppressed by their own government, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez promised Friday that he would not visit the United States again until Americans "liberate" their nation.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (L) and his Cuban counterpart Fidel Castro (2nd R) laugh during an anti-Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) meeting in Havana April 28, 2005. The two leaders are seeking to build an alternative to the U.S.-backed FTAA, from which Cuba is excluded. Castro declared the FTAA dead and said the U.S. proposal for a single free-trade bloc of the Americas was an 'anexionist plan' aimed at plundering Latin American resources. REUTERS/Mariana Bazo
Chavez, in Havana for trade talks, told an international gathering of activists here that before an earlier trip to Cuba, a U.S. State Department undersecretary he did not identify warned him not to go because he would no longer be received in Washington.

He said he went ahead with that trip anyway, and later traveled to the United States to visit U.S. President George W. Bush, who he said greeted him with a Coca-Cola in his hand.

"I have not returned, nor do I think about returning again, until the people of the United States liberate that nation," said Chavez, saying that Americans are "oppressed" by their government and U.S. media.

While Chavez didn't elaborate, the implication was that he wouldn't return to the United States until the current administration was out of power.

Chavez considers Cuban President Fidel Castro a political ally and close personal friend, and Washington has grown increasingly alarmed by their deepening political and economic alliance.

During Chavez's current visit, the two countries have signed a host of economic and other accords, including a deal for Cuba to buy US$412 million (euro319 million) in goods from the South American nation, with Cuba waiving all import duties.

Venezuela's state oil company also has opened an office here this week, agreeing to help explore for and refine any crude deposits discovered off the island's coast. It also announced that the 53,000 barrels it has been sending to Cuba since 2000 at preferential terms was recently increased to up to 90,000 barrels daily.

Chavez also criticized the current Latin American tour by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, referring to her as an "imperial lady" who is trying to divide and conquer the hemisphere's developing nations.

Despite Chavez's anti-U.S. comments, his country is the world's fifth largest oil exporter and a top crude supplier to the United States.

GeekUSA

5th May 2005, 01:00

Ah, well, Rock on Venezuela!! :hammer:

Mr Brightside

24th May 2005, 20:15

Something I read today that might be of some interest...

"The President (Chavez) wants to hold talks with Iran about developing nuclear power, it emerged yesterday. Hugo Chavez described the move as a 'path towards diversifying energy resources'. But he did not say whether Iranian officials had agreed. Mr Chavez has defended Iran's right to develop a nuclear energy programme for peaceful reasons, despite opposition from the US. He argues that wealthy countries should not keep technology for themselves while developing nations struggle to generate power."

Poum_1936

27th May 2005, 19:34

Speech from the second day of Bolivia's Gas War...

Jaime Solares, leader of the COB, called for nationalization, the closing of the Parliament, and the resignation of Carlos Mesa. He also called on the examples of Venezuela and Cuba to inspire the crowd. When he asked, “Who is the President of Venezuela?” thirty thousand protesters yelled back, “Chávez!

http://www.zmag.org/content/showart...=52&ItemID=7937

Venezuela is becoming a beacon of hope for Latin America.

chebol

5th June 2005, 01:36

VENEZUELA: A movement of revolutionary ideas
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/628/628p14.htm
Roberto Jorquera, Caracas

On May 21, more than 1000 people attended the Third National Seminar on Ideological Formation, organised by the Centres for Ideological Formation (CFIs). The CFIs are grassroots groups initiated in March this year by William Izarra, who has emerged as a key leader of the Bolivarian revolution — the popular process led by the government of President Hugo Chavez that is attempting to overturn capitalism and create a democratic socialist society.

Izarra is currently the national director of the CFIs and the deputy minister for foreign relations for the Middle East, Asia and Oceania. A veteran Marxist, Izarra was a leader of the revolutionary organisation that Chavez led inside the armed forces, the MBR-200, and when Chavez formed a new party, the Movement for the Fifth Republic (MVR), to contest the 1998 presidential elections, Izarra was the MVR's first national director.

Elected to the National Congress (since replaced by the National Assembly) in 1999, he resigned his seat and left the MVR after disagreements with Chavez's then-mentor, the moderate Luis Miquilena, who later joined the right-wing opposition. Izarra formed his own organisation, the Movement for Direct Democracy, which was dedicated to supporting Chavez and the Bolivarian revolution while promoting policies to put greater power directly in the hands of the people. Izarra's return to the central leadership indicates the radical direction of the Bolivarian revolution.

On March 27, Vheadline posted a call from Izarra for the formation of CFIs across Venezuela, each to consist of at least 30 revolutionary militants. In the call, Izarra explained that the CFIs should hold daily discussions on theory to “invent the route which the revolution can travel along”. Izarra claimed that “the inherited reformist culture is present in almost all levels of the state, is still operating to exploit power and inspire corruption”, and argued that the CFIs were crucial to replacing this with a revolutionary culture.

The CFIs’ main objectives are: spreading the anti-capitalist ideology of the Bolivarian revolution; discussing how to form political organisations capable of making the ideology a reality; and the investigation of socialist theory.

Already the most conscious revolutionary activists have begun to register for the CFIs, which are not tied to any political party. All 1000 participants in the May 21 seminar, including many from the Bolivarian Houses, the Endogenous Battle Units (UBE) and other popular organisations, registered. The CFIs will be organised through local branches called Centres for Education and Investigation of the Bolivarian Revolution. A national office for the CFIs will also be established in the next few months.

As part of the May 21 seminar, Izarra also appealed to those present to join, or recruit to, a new diplomatic corps the government was creating. The existing diplomatic corps remains almost unchanged from the pre-Chavez days and the majority are either hostile to, or at least not active supporters of, the revolution. The government aims to train and dispatch more than 100 new embassy staff over the next few years.

Izarra told those present that “we need to continue to combat those that simply put on their red shirts and caps and call themselves Chavistas, but in fact do not have any revolutionary blood in them”, adding that “the structure of the state is still that of the [pre-Chavez] Fourth Republic, which means that the electoral structures hinder the participation of the people — this needs to be transformed so that the mayors are truly the spokespeople of the revolution and not controlling the people”.

Again emphasising the importance of developing a deep understanding of theory, Izarra recommeneded reading socialist theory and the works of the three key leaders of Venezuela's independence struggle: Simon Bolivar, Simon Rodriquez and Ezequial Zamora.

Izarra noted three key areas where the revolution needed to develop: The need for increased democratisation of state structures to develop peoples participation in government; the development of the endogenous (or self sufficient) development model as an alternative to imperialist exploitation; and the need to develop a new system of international relations based on sovereignty and mutual respect.

Izarra argued strongly that there could not be a revolutionary process that excluded Hugo Chavez, criticising those who have argued that organising for a socialist revolution should be done outside the Chavista movement.

From Green Left Weekly, June 1, 2005.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.

*Hippie*

7th June 2005, 19:03

Why is there no coverage about the revolution on the news here in Canada? :unsure:

codyvo

13th June 2005, 23:51

Originally posted by *Hippie*@Jun 7 2005, 06:03 PM
Why is there no coverage about the revolution on the news here in Canada? :unsure:
Because all media in north america sucks.

Did anyone else see Hugo bet Bush one dollar that he would last longer?

LoL84

1st July 2005, 00:01

An article coming from "Rouge" the weekly newspapers of the French section of the fourth International.

Chávez remakes the world with Chirac

The president of the Republic bolivarian of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, completed nine days a world diplomatic round on last 9 March in Paris. On this occasion, a "meeting" was envisaged at the house of the Radio with that which stole the starring of Lula at the time of the last world social Forum of Oporto Alegre. Hugo Chávez countermaned himself. He preferred to go to the Elysium and to negotiate with Total".

It is well-known: time, it is money! And Chávez made profitable its twenty-four hours Parisian stopover: "Total will pass from 200 000 to 400 000 oil barrels by day, it will double [ its production ], with an investment of several billion dollars", it triumphed, over the perron of the Elysium after a maintenance of more than one hour with Jacques Chirac. Venezuela is the fifth world oil exporter. France is the second investor of the country. The interest of Chávez and Chirac was to get along...

And rather than to give voice counters the Bush administration at the house of the Radio, the president vénézuélien got busy to give again breath with a partnership with France enabling him to loosen a little the american vice which encloses it. Venezuela is the second oil supplier of the United States with the economic dependence which results from this - Venezuela sells 85 % of its production to with it, that is to say 15 % of the provisioning of the United States. And the pressure of the US imperialism against the capacity in place in Caracas has increased dangerously for a few months: the agreements signed in Paris, like the contracts signed with Russia, ensure Chávez of supports of weight at the time when it shows Washington to want to make an attempt on its life.

Some see in the volte-face of the president Venezuelan in Paris a sign of contradictions and tensions which cross the administration vénézuelienne. One finds in a hardly different form the idea put forward at the time of the arrival to the power of the Party of the workers in Brazil, evoking "the two hearts of the Lula government". On a side, one explained, was the bourgeoisie, other the working class: the interests of the ones and others were entering in conflict.

According to this point of view, it was necessary to weigh to tip the scales on the good side, including until taking part in the government where the licensed representatives of the IMF and the World Bank sat. The experiment confirmed the inconsistency of this reasoning; worse, it revealed of it all the danger to the Brazilian workers, disorientated and without capable organization to defend them vis-a-vis the overall questionings their assets, to start with their retirement.

If a contradiction existed indeed in Brazil, it did not cross the government whose intentions were not any doubt before even its constitution. Contradiction was between the aspirations of those which carried Lula to the power and the antisocial policy of structural adjustment ordered by the IMF and the World Bank that the government of WP and its allies defended. The triumph of Lula did not symbolize the revenge of Porto Alegre on Davos; it testified, on the contrary, of conversion to the social-liberalism from which none the reformists families escape, and which gangrene "left of left" or labellized like such. Lula and wp succeeded, for a time, to channel the popular discontent.

To deceive itself on the anticapitalism of Chávez is carrying the same danger. Chávez is not consequent Lula, energy where the first would refuse to go. Admittedly, in Oporto Alegre, the president of the bolivarian Republic of Venezuela quotes Trotsky in front of 15 000 people. It is true, it is made the cantor of a "bolivarian revolution" which it intends to export - "It is necessary to invent the socialism of XXIe century" says it. Yes, it radicalized its speech to gain the adhesion of the masses.

"To deny their rights to the people is the way of cruelty, hammered Chávez in front of an enthusiastic audience in Oporto Alegre. Capitalism, it is cruelty. I am a little more convinced by it each day [... ]. Many intellectuals say that capitalism should be transcended, but I add that one cannot transcend it within the framework of capitalism, not. It should be transcended by the way of socialism [... ], true socialism ".

But which policy does it carry out concretely since its victory to the presidential election in 1998 and its re-election in 2000? Did it nationalize the oil complex which is ensured of juicy profit when the masses live in misery? It does not defend the need of it. Did it expropriate the land great landowners who exploit and starve the proletariat of the cities and the campaigns? It refuses to call into question the private property. Did it simply redistribute the many grounds which the State has to reduce the burden which weighs on million family? It reduces the land reform to the portion congrue by redistributing grounds, for the hour, with 100 000 families.

In Oporto Alegre, Chávez was, this year, guest officially by the Movement of Without Ground of Brazil. What a paradox! Less than 5 % of the landowners of Venezuela have nearly 80 % of the total of the land goods, while 75 % of the small farmers had only 6 % of them; and the situation does not leave not transformed after seven years Chávez presidency. Its policy by no means slices that of his "friend" Lula; and due, on Venezuela as in Brazil, hour of globalisation, the constraints of the unrestrained race to the profits impose their diktats on the reports of production dominated by capitalism. The difference, if difference there is between the two countries, is due to the oil revenue which ensures the Chávez team of consequent incomes to finance a social policy when the Lula government is, strangled to him by a colossal debt. In a case as in the other, there is an alternative: socialism. But still is necessary it to rely on the intervention from the working class. And Chávez as Lula meet to reject the prospect for it.

"the revolution in the revolution" advanced by the leader Venezuelan takes again the claim reformist of a revolution without revolutionary rupture, holding for accessory what marks the starting point of any orientation aiming at the end of any exploitation and any oppression: the expropriation of the bourgeoisie and destruction of the State which ensures its domination of class to him on the majority of the population. Chávez perhaps read the permanent revolution of Trotsky but it seeks to operate a change that Trotsky estimated impossible already 70 years ago. There is no interval. The fight against capitalism calls average revolutionary, without what the asserted goal - socialism - is nothing.

It is the one century lesson of failures of reformism. And it is a lesson which the revolutionary should contemplate at the time when their responsibilities are multiplied by ten with the obliteration of the organizations which framed the labour movement. The area abounds in examples, of Cuba in Nicaragua.

Systematically to seek sectors of the bourgeoisie on which to be based rather than miser on the fight independent of the workmen, the peasants and the poor, is the surest means of giving in saddle of the solutions which are not, if not for the too happy bourgeoisie to see the combativeness of the masses diverted of the fight for the capacity. To gain the poor proletariat and peasants or without ground which, incontestably, support Chávez today, with the project of an organization of the workers entirely independent of the bourgeoisie and not defending that its own interests is obviously another history. But it there not of another way so that the popular movement whose Chavez knew to seize and use contradictions and the weaknesses can follow its own policy, not only against the hurdy-gurdies classes reactionaries but also in all independence of the bourgeoisie and the nationalist lower bourgeoisie.

In Latin America and elsewhere, the history brought cruel denials to those which were plugged by experiments comparable with those of Brazil or Venezuela so that it is not allowed to join again, again, with the same illusions. Clearness is complementary to support for the people of Venezuela against the classes reactionaries and the imperialism.

Matty_UK

10th July 2005, 11:32

Venezuela is preparing to repel an attack from the US! This is good news; America can now see there is no way it can keep the people down again, the Venezuelans have learned. It seems that after what the US did in 80s Latin America they have learned to take precautions-there is no way America will risk an invasion now, they cannot be successful. This also seems to be a new way of protecting democracy from the US-organise the people into militias so the guerilla war is strong before it even begins. A clever way to sort out the difference in military strength.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4635187.stm

Chavez's 'citizen militias' on the march
By Mike Ceaser
In Caracas, Venezuela

Rafael Cabrices does not know whether the attack will come by sea, by land, or even from within Venezuela.

But he is sure that US President George W Bush is plotting to oust leftist President Hugo Chavez - and Mr Cabrices is preparing his people to fight.

"That crazy man wants the petroleum," Mr Cabrices, 60, says in his office decorated with posters of Che Guevara, Simon Bolivar and President Chavez.

In the empty parking lot outside, civilian "corporals" bark commands at groups of adults and teenagers in white shirts and black caps and pants. They are marching around, training for battle.

Over recent months, the populist president has warned that the US may invade Venezuela or try to assassinate him. He has called for Venezuelans to join a new civil reserve defence force, which, it is claimed, numbers two million members.

During a recent commemoration of a revolutionary war battle, Mr Chavez called for preparation for an "asymmetric war" against the world's most powerful nation.

Militaristic

"If somebody meddles with Venezuela, they'll repent for 100 centuries," the President declared. "If we have to fight a war to defend this country, we'll make the blood flow."

The training of citizen-soldiers is part of an increasingly militaristic emphasis in the six-year-old 'Revolution for the Poor' headed by Mr Chavez, a former army paratrooper who led a failed military coup attempt in 1992.

During recent months, Venezuela has been buying 100,000 AK-47 rifles and military helicopters from Russia, as well as ships and planes from Brazil and Spain. The arms-buying spree worries Colombian leaders, while US officials have asked why Venezuela bought more rifles than it has soldiers. Those officials have suggested that excess rifles might be smuggled to illegal armed groups in Colombia.

"What in the world [is the threat] that Venezuela sees that makes them want to have all those weapons?" US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told the Miami Herald recently.

Mr Chavez's warnings that the US, which buys most of Venezuela's oil, might invade, have resonated with his supporters. They have been suspicious ever since Washington rushed to endorse the April 2002 coup which briefly unseated the president.

Venezuelan officials assert that the arms and the citizen reserve are for purely defensive purposes and that Washington resents the fact that Venezuela did not buy US-made weapons.

'Fatherland or death'

Mr Cabrices' 140-member-strong Popular Defence Unit trains weekends and weekday evenings in an empty parking lot in a middle-class Caracas neighbourhood called "The Paradise".

The quiet street leading to the site is lined by homes, pre-schools and a hospital. On a warm evening, a group of about a dozen men and women in their 20s and 30s march stiffly to their corporal's commands of "Left, right, left".

Nearby, teenage boys and girls seated on the ground listen to their commander explain how 'imperialism' undermined Bolivar's revolution.

"The president is talking about" the threat of an invasion, "and the president doesn't talk foolishness," says Olimpia Hung, a cheery 44-year-old clothing merchant and impassioned Chavez supporter. "Fatherland or death."

The reserve unit has no weapons, Mr Cabrices says, but he wants some. He interrupted an interview to ask a reporter if he know anyone who could bring them arms.

"For defence one needs arms," he says. "It's logical."

'Revolution'

Paunchy, grey-haired and wearing a red shirt with the slogan "Combatant of the Revolution", Rafael Cabrices is a polarising figure here.

During the April 2002 coup, he was among a group of Chavez supporters filmed firing guns from a downtown Caracas bridge. Many Chavez opponents accuse the bridge gunmen of shooting some of the 17 people killed and more than 100 wounded that day.

But Cabrices says he fired only at anti-Chavez police and hit nobody.

After the president's supporters swept him back to power, Mr Cabrices and others were jailed for a year and then cleared. To Chavez opponents, he represents the violence and lawlessness they say the president's "revolution" promotes.

"If Cabrices is a leader, then he can lead other prisoners in jail," says Mohamad Merhi, whose son Jesus was shot and killed while participating in an anti-Chavez demonstration during the coup.

After leaving jail, Mr Cabrices established this government-sponsored "endogenous nucleus", an initiative to promote self-help among the poor.

The nucleus has a small hydroponic vegetable garden, as well as Cuban doctors who provide basic medical care.

Within two years, he says, the nucleus's members will build housing, stores and factories on the parking lot.

Internal dissent

But it is the group's military training which has attracted attention. Critics say Venezuela's new military reserves are intended more to intimidate domestic opponents than to repel foreign invaders.

"We could come to a point where this militia could take over Venezuela," says Daniel, a neighbour and university student who would not give his last name. "You and I couldn't be here talking in the street."

But retired General Alberto Muller, a military analyst who is close to Chavez government officials, says Venezuela's new reserve is similar to the US's own Army Reserve and civilian forces in many nations.

"The ideal would be like Switzerland, where every citizen has his weapon in his home," Mr Muller says.

Many observers dismiss the idea that the US would, or even could, invade Venezuela, a democratic nation and crucial oil supplier, particularly with the US military already overstretched in Iraq.

US officials have frequently criticised Mr Chavez's domestic and foreign policies, but dismiss suggestions that Washington is planning military action against the supplier of 14% of its petroleum imports.

Colombian military analyst Alfredo Rangel, who heads the Security and Democracy Foundation in Bogota, says the reserve forces' real purpose is to repress internal dissent, and suggested that they will be given some of Venezuela's new Russian rifles.

Rangel says nobody will invade Venezuela, but that if the civil reserves were to confront a trained military force "they wouldn't stand a chance," he says.

Not everybody sees the civilian forces as so threatening. Ana Maria, a slim, soft-voiced 17-year-old member of Cabrices' unit, said the experience is teaching her discipline, values and self-defence skills.

"I'm learning to defend my Fatherland and myself," she says. "It has nothing to do with weapons."

Severian

5th August 2005, 20:13

Reports from Venezuela, in the Militant:
Venezuelan peasants demand land, protest thug attacks (http://www.themilitant.com/2005/6928/692803.html)

BY ARGIRIS MALAPANIS
AND CARLOS CORNEJO
CARACAS, Venezuela—More than 5,000 peasants from across the country marched here July 11. They protested the murders of some 130 peasant leaders at the hands of the thugs of big capitalist farmers and landowners over the last six years. They also called on the government to step up the issuing of titles to landless rural families and credits to working farmers.

“Since President Hugo Chávez decreed a ‘war on the latifundios’ [large estates], the big landowners have been waging a veritable war against us,” Claudio Ditulio, a peasant from the Rojas municipality in Barinas state, told the Militant. Ditulio is a representative of the Ezequiel Zamora National Peasant Front, one of the main groups that sponsored the action.

“In the last six months, hitmen have been killing almost one peasant a week. And no one has been arrested or convicted for the murders,” he said.

“Justice! Justice! No impunity for the landowners,” chanted the protesters as they marched for five hours from the Valle neighborhood to downtown Caracas, where they held rallies outside the Ministry of Justice and then at the National Assembly. Many demonstrators carried cornstalks or machetes and marched to the rhythm of drums.

The government had said the January 10 decree Ditulio was referring to would speed up land redistribution, which peasants say has been slow. According to the government’s National Land Institute (INTi), in the period between 2001, when a new agrarian reform law was adopted, and the end of last year, 115,000 peasant families received titles to 9 million acres of land, nearly all of it state-owned. Hundreds of thousands remain landless.

About 5 percent of Venezuela's population owns 75 percent of the arable land, much of which is idle. At the same time, Venezuela imports 60 percent of its food.

Battles for land
Many peasants at the march described battles for land they have been involved in. “We've occupied 3,000 hectares [7,400 acres] of the Turagua ranch for six years,” said José Querales, a member of the Guaritico farm cooperative in Montecal, Apure state. “We have drilled water wells, we have electricity, and we’re producing. But three years after applying, we don’t have titles and can’t get credit.”

About half of the 123,000-acre Turagua cattle ranch is idle, Querales said. It is owned by the Vesteys, a British capitalist family that has fought to prevent hundreds of peasants from taking over another of its ranches, El Charcote, in Cojedes state.

Peasants from several areas of Barinas reported that local authorities have driven them off land they occupied. Ditulio said 300 peasant families have been cultivating thousands of acres of farmland left idle by four big landlords in the Rojas municipality. “The police and National Guard have kicked us out three times in two years but we’ve been back and we intend to stay,” he said.

These struggles by peasants have been met with violence from hired guns. Hilda Pérez de Sanoja described how her husband, Manuel Sanoja, was shot dead on Nov. 27, 2000, after leading peasants in Guanare, Portuguesa state, to occupy idle land claimed by the wealthy Rodríguez family. “Juan Rodríguez’s lawyer took Manuel to meet with the owner and his two sons, and that’s where he was found dead,” she said.

“Now the investigation is over and they know who did it, but neither the attorney general nor anyone else has said a word.” Since then, she said, the peasants’ struggle to till part of the estate has been paralyzed.

Many of those who have won land titles face an uphill battle in receiving low-interest loans from state banks. Orecho Gonzalo said 84 families in Villa Rosario, Zulia state, obtained titles two years ago after a five-year occupation. But they are still waiting for credit. They are also demanding a road be built from their farms to the town where they sell their produce. They now have to walk six miles to get there.

Ibelis Vernet, an economist at INTi, confirmed in an interview that many of the 115,000 farm families who have won land titles have yet to get loans. “The state doesn't have enough resources to give credits to all the peasants requesting it,” she said.

A statement by the National Peasant Front, widely distributed at the march and read at the final rally outside the National Assembly, said in part, “We don’t see progress toward a transformation of land ownership…. Credits and machinery remain under the control of big ranchers and farmers who have always exploited us. If this is not corrected, a new landlord elite will emerge.”

Braulio álvarez, a founder of the Ezequiel Zamora National Agrarian Coordinating Committee and a National Assembly deputy, also spoke at the rally. On June 23 álvarez escaped an attempt on his life in his native state of Yaracuy. He told peasants not to vacillate in “our struggle for land and justice.”

Ricardo Gutiérrez, vice-president of Venezuela’s National Assembly, and agriculture minister Antonio Albarrán sounded a different tone. Albarrán said measures would be taken against the crimes of big landlords and urged “discipline.” When Gutiérrez promised a meeting a week later with representatives of the peasant groups to discuss their demands, he was met with cries of disapproval.

Dissatisfied, most protesters marched to the Miraflores presidential palace and camped outside. Many said they would stay there until they could meet with the president.

Olympia Newton contributed to this article.

***

Venezuelan workers fight to restart plants (http://www.themilitant.com/2005/6931/693159.html)

Government confiscates some shut-down
companies, promotes ‘co-management’

BY ARGIRIS MALAPANIS
LOS TEQUES, Venezuela—“In April the National Assembly declared this factory a public utility and expropriated it,” said José Quintero, a welder at Inveval, which produces valves for the oil industry. The plant, previously called Constructora Nacional de Válvulas, is located at the top of a hill near this city in Miranda state, about an hour south of Caracas, the capital.

The former owner of Inveval, Andrés Sosa Pietri, was a figure in the country’s main business association, Fedecámaras, which backed the April 2002 military coup attempt and the employers’ lockout later that year that sought to topple the government headed by President Hugo Chávez. Pietri shut down the plant during the lockout, which was centered in the oil industry. The “oil coup” failed after Venezuelan working people mobilized to restart production and popular support for the bosses’ action dwindled.

Afterward Pietri demanded workers agree to reopen the contract and take steep cuts in wages and benefits to “save” the company. Workers refused. Pietri then tried to move machinery out of the factory. In response, workers occupied the plant in May 2003. They demanded the government nationalize it and aid them to restart production.

A little more than half of the 120 workers remained involved in the two-year-long struggle. Speaking with Militant reporters July 4, José Rondón said they survived during this period thanks to solidarity from workers in nearby plants and other companies.

“In the last three months of 2004 we suspended the occupation due to difficulties in making ends meet,” said Luisa Morales, an office worker. The owners then tried again to remove equipment. “But we were monitoring the situation and reoccupied the plant. We stopped Pietri’s sinister plans a second time.”

During the occupations workers organized the Conflict Committee, which replaced the union after local metalworkers union officials sided with the boss. The metalworkers union was affiliated to the Confederation of Venezuelan Workers (CTV), which backed the reactionary national lockout.

The government decided to confiscate the company, Quintero said, after the latest action by the owners and the reoccupation by the workers. Today the state holds a 51 percent stake in the new company and workers, now organized in a cooperative, hold 49 percent. The workers have elected members to a new board of directors who will serve along with managers appointed by the state.

Quintero and other workers said this is not exactly what they demanded. Most of the dozen workers interviewed at the plant gate said workers need to have complete control of production and job conditions. They are now organized through a factory committee that calls monthly assemblies of employees, while workers carry out repairs and maintenance in preparation for restarting production some time this fall.

Julio Rángel, another worker, said this is difficult to do in one factory alone. Quintero and others said that to try to push the process forward they are collaborating with workers in several other factories where “co-management” is being implemented by the government instead of nationalization under workers’ control of production. These plants include Alcasa, an aluminum mill in Bolívar state, and the former Venepal in Carabobo (see articles below). Co-management is also in place at Invetex, a textile mill in Cojedes, and Pío Tamayo, a sugar mill in Lara. Invetex is privately owned. Its board includes the boss and representatives of the workers and government.

BY OLYMPIA NEWTON
AND CARLOS CORNEJO
CIUDAD GUAYANA, Venezuela—Last December, workers at the state-owned ALCASA aluminum mill here slowed down production to demand 13 billion bolívars ($600,000) in unpaid wages and benefits. “We brought production down by 40 percent,” Enrique José Contreras, a line operator, said in a July 6 interview. Contreras said workers argued the company had been operating in the red for 16 years. They demanded the books be open to public inspection and a new management be installed.

The company tried unsuccessfully to fire 20 union leaders. The governor of Bolívar state, of the governing Fifth Republic Movement, sent in 80 National Guardsmen to “protect the factory” and make sure production kept going.

“There was no confrontation because we didn’t let the troops provoke us,” said Manuel Figuera, a member of the executive board of Sintralcasa, the union representing 2,350 production workers. Some 500 others work here as contractors. The plant produces primary aluminum products, which are exported mostly to U.S. and European factories making soda cans and other finished goods. “We explained our demands and won public opinion to our side,” Figuera said. In the end, the troops were pulled out.

In February, the government replaced most managers. The plant is now run under “co-management.” ALCASA’s board includes two directors elected by the workers and four appointed by the state. Foremen were also changed.

Figuera said that this type of co-management “can exist even in private companies.” He added that he is not for a wholesale nationalization of the economy. “That is risky,” he said. “We depend a lot on the U.S. economy, so we’re not for bringing down the empire. Just a more equal society.”

The company is using the new setup to draw workers toward increasing productivity, with the help of union officers. “Now that we have co-management, the union no longer speaks only of raising wages,” said Trino Silva, the union’s general secretary. “We have to increase production and lower costs.” Production at the plant has increased from an average of 400 tons a day last year to 537 tons a day now, he noted.

During a union meeting at the plant entrance July 7, workers expressed various views on the new set-up. “I’m for co-management,” said Fidel García, a maintenance technician. “Getting rid of the old management was a victory. But up to now it hasn’t resolved the problem of the unpaid wages and benefits.”

“The new management punishes you the same and job conditions haven’t improved,” said Gonzalo Rommel, a machine operator. “We still haven’t gotten our back pay, which is why we slowed down production in the first place.”

BY ARGIRIS MALAPANIS
AND CARLOS CORNEJO
MORóN, Venezuela—Venepal was one of the main producers of paper and cardboard in this country, supplying 40 percent of the domestic market and exporting throughout Latin America. Its paper mill and associated paper bag and notebook plants here employed 1,200 workers. The company had two other plants in the nearby city of Valencia, also in Carabobo state, and Maracay, in the neighboring state of Araguá.

On January 19 the government expropriated the bankrupt company after a two-year-long struggle during which workers demanded its nationalization. Renamed Invepal, the company reopened in May under “co-management.” The new five-person board of directors is made up of three elected by the workers and two appointed by the state. Edgar Peña, the former union president, is the new president of Invepal.

“The expropriation of Venepal is an exception, not a political measure,” President Hugo Chávez told the press after signing the takeover. “If it’s yours, it’s yours. But for the company that is closed and abandoned, we’ll go for them.” In his weekly television program Aló Presidente (Hello President) on July 17, Chávez said the government may confiscate over 100 such companies.

Rowan Jiménez, a maintenance worker at the Morón mill who is now responsible for public relations, said workers belong to a cooperative, which holds a 49 percent stake in the company. The state owns 51 percent.

Jiménez and other workers described the struggle that led to the expropriation. It included a sit-down strike between July and September 2003, sparked by layoffs of 600 workers and announced wage cuts. The owners had shut down the plant between December 2002 and January 2003 as part of the employers’ lockout, and afterward claimed they were broke. An agreement the owners and the union announced in the fall of 2003 was short-lived.

Manrique González, Invepal’s production coordinator and a former salesperson for Venepal, is one of few administrative employees who stayed. “I showed the union evidence that the owners had plans to bankrupt the company and take their capital abroad,” he said. Last September, after the failure of the recall referendum against the Chávez administration, Venepal declared bankruptcy and announced it would sell machinery to pay creditors.

In response, workers occupied the Morón mill for five months, guarding the facilities around the clock and organizing solidarity rallies. “We also went to Caracas to demand nationalization,” said Jorge Guasimucaro. They received support from other working people, including from oil workers at the nearby El Palito refinery who provided food during the takeover. The 300 workers who stayed in the plant during the occupation are the ones working now, having started up parts of the complex. If they bring production to pre-2002 levels, Jiménez said, another 1,000 workers would have to be hired.

Workers here said the expropriation was a victory in their struggle, but one riddled with contradictions.

“We now control our job conditions and make decisions on how to organize production,” said José Campos, a machine operator at the paper bag plant. He and other workers also said this needs to be extended to the entire operation, involving more and more workers in administrative tasks. Workers said everyone now is paid 500,000 bolívars per month ($232), slightly more than the minimum wage and less than their pay under the former Venepal. Several workers said that as “co-owners,” organized into a cooperative that has replaced the union, it’s harder to ask for better pay until the company gets on its feet and becomes profitable.

One of the two production lines in the mill that workers restarted two months ago was down on July 8. Production during this period has been running at 25 percent of capacity, workers said.

“The main reason is lack of raw materials,” mainly paper pulp that is imported from Chile, said mill worker Carlos Alberto González. Several workers said there is a political reason behind the lack of paper pulp. There is opposition within the government to making the new company a success, because it could set a “bad example” of what could be done with other private industries, the workers said.

mi-tierra-mi-libertad

15th August 2005, 04:59

Como latino me declaro soberano y libre ... USA dame mi libertad!!dejame respirar!!! Gracias a beneficios economicos de gringolandia miles mueren!!!Sangre corre por dinero , sangre latina , es justo???

chebol

23rd August 2005, 07:34

Chavez imparts sense of revolutionary urgency to revolutionary youth
leaders.

[Speech delivered by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on August 13 to
representatives of the delegations from 144 countries to the 16th
World Federation of Democratic Youth festival held in Caracas from
August 8 - 15, 2005. This speech, delivered to youth leaders from
around the world, raises similar themes that Chavez forcibly repeated
during a series of speeches to festival participants. The speech was
translated by Federico Fuentes, representative of the Australian
delegation and leader of socialist youth organisation Resistance.]

I was remembering Karl Marx and Rosa Luxemburg and the phrase that
each one of then, in their particular time and context put forward;
the dilemma `socialism or barbarism´. Marx, the original author of
this phrase, and of all the dilemmas contained in it, ´socialism or
barbarism´, put forward that phrase looking towards a future horizon.

Afterwards, years after, Rosa Luxemburg also thought of this issue
with the understanding that some day, at some moment in the not so
immediate future, human beings would see ourselves in a future moment,
confronted with a crossroad which would urge us to make a collective
decision, a decision to change the social order to save life on this
planet, to achieve survival, social progress and equality, and what is
for many utopia, or on the contrary, confronted with this dilemma,
this crossroad, not being capable of make real changes, we would allow
the end of life on this planet, the actually survival of our species.

So, Karl Marx could reflect, think and write looking towards a
distance future, a century, the same could be said of Rosa
Luxemburg…..but for us it can't. The circumstances have changed
terribly. The situation today is radically different. We don't have
centuries in front of us, it could be decades at most that are left
for the peoples of this planet to make a decision. Or we really change
the social and economic order, we give real form, viability and outlet
for socialism, we say now a new, renovated socialism of the 21st
century, or we decide that life finishes on this planet. We no longer
have the long time that Karl Marx had, or any other fighter of that
era….

This reflection is something I feel deep in my heart because of my
profound conviction that the planet is being degraded more and more
everyday, and that life on this planet is under threat. Because of
this today more that every the dilemma has return with much more
force, socialism or barbarism.
I believe it is time that we take up with courage and clarity a
political, social, collective and ideological offensive across the
world. A real offensive that permits us to move progressively, over
the next years, the next decades, leaving behind the perverse,
destructive, destroyer, capitalist model and go forward in
constructing the socialist model to avoid barbarism and beyond that
the annihilation of life on this planet. I believe this idea has a
strong connection with reality. I don't think we have much time. Fidel
Castro said in one of his speeches I read not so long ago, ´tomorrow
could be too late, let's do now what we need to do´. I don't believe
that this is an exaggeration. The planet will disintegrate, society
will disintegrate, the environment is suffering damage that could be
irreversible, global warming, the greenhouse effect, the melting of
the polar ice caps, the rising sea level, hurricanes, the terrible
social occurrences that have shaken life on this planet.

Comrades, that is why I believe that in all the history of the World
Festival of Youth and Students, which already has nearly 60 years, the
World Federation of Democratic youth is 60 years old and the festival
has 58 years. I believe that never before has it been necessary that
the festival, this festival, our festival, does not finish the day of
the closing ceremony, but rather that the festival is the beginning of
a new stage of conformation, of impulsion of a powerful global
movement, or of strengthening, because it already exists, giving it an
overall orientation in each continent, region, subregion, bringing
closer together the social movements, political movements, movements
for transformation, revolutionary movements, workers, the working
class, indigenous peoples, students, youth, women, thinkers,
intellectuals, all of us to grow in strength…..
This same preoccupation, this same anguish, this same idea I
transmitted last December during two significant events in Caracas….At
the gathering of Artists and Intellectuals in Defence of Humanity I
commented to my friends that we can not discuss for 100 years more, we
can't spend much time debating. The debate must be permanent, but
action must also be permanent. Debate must be accompanied by action
and that action as according to the dialectic, must permanently feed
into the debate.

It is the moment of offensive, of the masses, of struggle, of battle.
It is a new moment we have now and we don't know if we will have
another moment later, we don't know if we will have time. I believe
there is not enough time to wait 50 years for another moment so
advantageous like this one to advance in the global struggle against
imperialism, against imperialist hegemony and for the creation of new
paths, the opening of new paths.

I was also spoke at the other event to the friends of the Congress of
the Bolivarian Peoples, where I proposed the creation of a type of
co-ordination, a commission, a group however we want to call it, that
dedicates itself to articulating itself with movements of the whole
world to initiate actions, design uniting schemes, strategies for the
whole world. I have to say I am not happy with the results… yet this
festival is a marvellous opportunity to insist on this point. At the
World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, I once again planted this idea,
because I have felt that in these events there is debate and debate
and debate, sometimes there aren't even conclusions. We spend 5 days,
8 days of much happiness, meetings, hugs, but this world is under
threat! We can't spend 50 more years like this, there won't be a world
in 50 years if we don't stop in some way the beast that is devouring
the planet and life on it….

We don't have much time in front of us, we don't have time to lose,
and hopefully something will come out from this encounter. I am at
your service to help in whatever way we can in this direction, all of
Venezuela is at your service to continue the process everyday, without
rest, this process of discussion, ideas, proposals, struggle and of
battle, and so as to not only see each other at festivals every four
years or every time there is a meeting of the G8 in some place where
some groups go to protest. That is not enough! We need to be at it
everyday and every night…or we save the world or we allow the world to
be uprooted……….

I remember that when I was in prison, I read an interview by
Commandante Tomas Borge with Fidel Castro.. from 1989-90. In the midst
of the collapse of the Soviet Union, in the midst of the collapse of
the socialist camp… in this interview Fidel, in the middle of this
darkness, it seems he could see a light and he said that soon there
would be a new wave of the peoples. He referred to Latin America in
particular but it is a wave across the world. And it is this
precisely, that is another characteristic of the moment we are living.
This characteristic, friends, comrades, could be a potential for
change that we need to take advantage of….

We are faced with a new threat; we don't have time to lose. We need to
arm ourselves from now with a spirit of the offensive, enough of being
defensive, the best defence is attack! All the military strategies
indicate that a war is never won on the defensive, you can pass to the
defence to win time, this is valid in military wars, political wars
and including in relationships this is valid…

Only on the offensive do you win the war, do you win the combat. What
is necessary is to know how to utilize the moment, it is necessary to
evaluate and create conditions. According to my criteria we are in a
moment for an offensive, we need to unleash it at a world level. I
believe it has been unleashed, we need to orientate it, co-ordinate it
better and we will have much better results, hopefully more sooner
than we expect….

I said earlier today in Teresa Carreno (theatre) you have to reproduce
yourselves. No young person from any part of the world who has
come…can get back and unpack their luggage and take up their
particular lives, their study, their family. No, those that did that
would be betraying the spirit of the festival. You have to get there
to reproduce yourself, to grow and multiply…

Each one of you needs to be an importer of this (information), repeat
it on the street corner and on the street, write it on the murals of
the cities, on the walls of the towns and cities, repeat it in the
universities, repeat it where you live, sleep, and work, in all parts,
without any type of rest. Go and repeat that imperialism is not
invincible, go and repeat that we are in a time of offensive, go and
repeat that a new time is approaching, go and repeat in different
areas that there is a threat that they need to see, hear. Go and fill
them with illusions, hope and strength, the peoples you represent,
that is one of the big tasks of every man and woman at this 16th
festival.

The success of this festival will not be measured here in Caracas, we
will see tomorrow or the day after if this festival has been useful
for something, or better said if it is successful, because it has been
useful for many things. For this festival, from my point of view, to
say that this festival was successful, tomorrow or the day after we
need to prove that it was had an impact over there in the four winds
of the five continents. An impact felt with the offensive of the
youth, who battle for the future because the future, said Che, belongs
to us. Today we have to say that it, the future, belongs to you.

Technique3055

23rd August 2005, 17:33

Robertson: U.S. should 'take out' Venezuela's Chavez (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/23/robertson.chavez/index.html)

If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Robertson told viewers on his "The 700 Club" show Monday. "It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war." Watch video of Robertson's comments

Robertson, a contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 1988, called Chavez "a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us badly."

"We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability," Robertson said. "We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."

Robertson accused Chavez, a left-wing populist with close ties to Cuban President Fidel Castro, of trying to make Venezuela "a launching pad for Communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent."

"This is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen," he said.

Chavez has said he believes the United States is trying to assassinate him, vowing that Venezuela, which accounts for more than 10 percent of U.S. oil imports, would shut off the flow of oil if that happens.

The Unites States has denied such allegations in the past.

Executive orders issued by Presidents Ford and Reagan banned political assassinations.

Robertson's comments Monday were the latest in a string of controversial remarks in recent years by the religious broadcaster and founder of the Christian Coalition.

Last October, during the heat of the presidential race, Robertson told CNN that during a meeting with President Bush before the invasion of Iraq, the president told him he did not believe there would be casualties. The White House strongly denied the claim.

In May, during an ABC interview, Robertson ignited a firestorm with his response to a question about whether activist judges were more of a threat to America than terrorists.

"If they look over the course of 100 years, I think the gradual erosion of the consensus that's held our country together is probably more serious than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings," he said.

Defending his remarks in a letter to Sen. Frank Lautenberg, Robertson insisted he was not being cavalier about the 9/11 attacks. But he also refused to apologize, saying Supreme Court rulings on abortion, religious expression in the public square, pornography and same-sex marriage "are all of themselves graver dangers in the decades to come than the terrorists which our great nation has defeated in Afghanistan and Iraq."

A 'nuke' for Foggy Bottom
In October 2003, Robertson, criticizing the State Department during an interview on "The 700 Club," said "maybe we need a very small nuke thrown off on Foggy Bottom to shake things up," referring to the nickname for the department's headquarters in Washington.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher called the remark "despicable."

In July 2003, Robertson asked his audience to pray for three justices to retire from the Supreme Court so they could be replaced with more conservative jurists. "One justice is 83 years old, another has cancer and another has a heart condition," he said.

Robertson insisted he was only calling for prayers for the justices to retire and was not asking his followers to pray for their demise.

In November 2002, Robertson charged that the Muslim holy book, the Quran, incites followers to kill people of other faiths and disputed Bush's characterization of Islam as a religion of peace.

"It's clear from the teachings of the Quran and also from the history of Islam that it's anything but peaceful," Robertson said in a subsequent interview with CNN. "Of course there are peace-loving Muslims. But at the same time, at the core of this religion ... is jihad, and it is to subject the unbelievers either to forced conversion or death. That's what it teaches."

So the founder and broudcaster of the Christian Coalition is calling for the assassination Chavez? Heh.

Seeker

23rd August 2005, 20:40

I still don't like the banks. They are the foundation of Capitalisim and the keystone. In Venezuela, they work pretty much the same way they do in the North.

Money comes from nothing for the bank, and must be paid back with interest by the people. Using this as a tool, banks are able to manipulate and acquire the means of production.

Foriegn exchange should not be used in local markets.

A new banking law passed in November 2001 (Decree No.1,526 published in Venezuela's Official Gazette No. 5,555) . . . has allowed foreign institutions to absorb 40 percent of all assets currently in the system . . .

link (http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/inimr-ri.nsf/en/gr121202e.html)

Fiscal policy of foriegn nations should not dictate if you can afford to buy bread from the local baker, or instead need to buy cheaper imports or become dependant on goverment handouts. Not even your own banks should dictate that.

I think that local currencies should be an option for things that are not intended for trade outside the community (food, services, energy . . . ).

The banks can maintain eternal control over Socialism unless they are completely re-engineered to serve the people as a tool (it's currently the other way around).

redmafiosi

25th August 2005, 18:03

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 09:23 PM
The U.$. Imperialist better keep out of Latin America for their sake.
The asshole Pat Robertson(one son of a ***** televangalist) is preaching to kill Hugo savace. fuck that Robertson first and put one scorpion in his dirty asshole.

Levin

26th August 2005, 15:40

Ok, I am new to this, just got signed up today, and I've read almost every posting here on this topic. I know that all of us want a revolution to happen, but I dont think from the post that I have read, that anything is really going to happen/change from this forum. First of all all the long articles, are just taken from websites or whereever. There is not a true discussion happening with knowledge and insight. I dont mean to shit on all of you, that's not what I am trying to do, all I want to do is make you all aware of what I have seen so far. I could be wrong and if so please write back with all the curse words you know.

Moving on, for the revolution to start and be successful in Venenzula. Simple signatures and riots are not going to make a lot of changes. All that shit has been around for years and how much help and how much progress has been seen from these tactics?? What needs to happen is real awareness ! WE need to start understanding that simply making comments concerning things that are well known to the publc, are not all the facts drowing this crisis. For example, we all know that u$ wants venenzula for its oil. But what we dont see happening in this situation is the contribution and the power that the CIA and others parts of the u$ government has.

Of course, that 'Holy' preist or whatever the fuck he is, wants to kill Chavez. First of all I can't believe such a figure would be aloud to make such comments! Imagine if someone from let say Iraq, not trying to be racist just making a point, said something like ' I think we should assisinate Bush, so the world and my country doesnt have to be supressed by the US government anymore.' That person would be six feet under before he could have even think of 'such a thing'. Secondly we all have to relize, that if the US government is willing to assisinate its own president[J.F. Kennedy]. They have to problem of doing the same in other countries, even though they might say they would never ever do something like that.*cough bullshit cough*

I think for a revolution to be victorious, the revolution has to be a slow progressive revolution. What I mean by this is that all the peasants and all those who accupy these third world countries need to be literate, which enables them to research and read the things that are happening in their country, whereas most of the time these people only recieve information from word of mouth which is never accurate. Also this would avoid the problem of landed US troops and others implamented to make imperalism sound 'good' and the revolution to be something 'bad'. See how this makes sense? all I have written so far has been wrtten quickly....seeing how I am at work[dont you wish you had my job?], so anything that doesnt make a lot of sense I can always try to elaborate later on, if anyone wants me to clerify anything. The reason I bring this topic up is because all you 'CHE FANATICS' should know that after the cuban revolution was won, by che and fidel, many pesant and many who could barely read took government positions concerning ecenomics, industrilization, etc. This had a big affect on the revolution process almost to the point that the cuban economy almost crashed.

But, Venenzula is different I understand. But people still need to be educated to support a complex government and a complex situation.

Lastly I will end in this, I have written a lot and I have forgotten some things to write down/slash didnt want to write them down, but I find funny that we are all asking for a revolution for Venenzula and as you can see by the folder reading next this topic, this topic is growing cold. Write back with your comments and I will try to write back as soon as I can.

Kez

26th August 2005, 23:59

I dont think the revolution is getting cold, far from it, it is increasing in pace, and deepening.

I think to some extent, the media blockade on Venezuela has had an effect on us as well. WE dont think of it as that important, but huge events are unfolding over there on a daily basis, and big revolutionary progress has been made.

Trouble is, a lot of us are not involved, when we should be.

Im going to make a list of areas of events in the next month concerning Venezuelan revolution, so everyone in the UK should take not and get involved!

in struggle,

Levin

28th August 2005, 21:52

I agree with everything you have said about the media struggles which we face in an imperalist country. Also we are not involved, always the downfall of a revolution.

I just want to point out again, that I believe revolutions like we have seen in CUBA and now venenzula, I believe to make imperalism history is to give education to everyone is these Third world countries. You cannot imagine how much of an impact this can have.

hey kez, I dont live in the UK but in Canada and its good to know that this revolution is getting some attention all over the world.

and what I meant about this revolution getting cold, I meant as in this forum; No one is talking ! I know great progress is being made in Venenzula and I hope they do get cozier with the Cubans.

Severian

29th August 2005, 03:13

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2005, 08:58 AM
I think for a revolution to be victorious, the revolution has to be a slow progressive revolution. What I mean by this is that all the peasants and all those who accupy these third world countries need to be literate,
Which is not going to happen under capitalism. It's only after working people take power that we have the chance to make universal literacy a reality.

The reason I bring this topic up is because all you 'CHE FANATICS' should know that after the cuban revolution was won, by che and fidel, many pesant and many who could barely read took government positions concerning ecenomics, industrilization, etc. This had a big affect on the revolution process almost to the point that the cuban economy almost crashed.

But finding educated people ain't a problem in Cuba anymore, is it?

Levin

29th August 2005, 14:13

To some certain extent I do agree with what you have said, but, what makes you think that this cannot happen under capitalism? of course it can, So easily too ! look, if you look at all the aid that has been invested in third world countries it would make your jaw drop, worse of all where has this money has gone? A lot of it goes to the organization itself so you can have a nice little shirt that says 'I sponser a child'. Also, I was watching CNN, and as biased as they are, they even admitted that these funds have gone into rebel hands that are not there fighting for a revolution. So if there was a true non-profit organization and this money was poured into third world countries which does not mean only AFRICA, cause everybody thinks if you give money to Africa poverty will end, people often forget about the poverty all over the world ! Back to what I was saying; If the aid was given to establish schools, which would have to provide SCHOOL SUPPLIES, AND MEALS ! [you have to remember most children will come hungry and will not be able to afford books and pencils, this has to be provided by the school itself through donations !] You would see children flood to these schools because there would be no excuses, most of the time children cannot go to school because simply they cannot afford to buy a 3 cent exercise book, and a 2 cent pencil. It is very possible that this can happen under capatilism, if capitalism will allow food to be donated to these coutries, we can donate schools! YOU ARE JUST MAKING EXCUSES LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, IF YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU SAID !

Of course you can find educated people in CUBA now and I bet you could before too ! but what roles did these educated people play before the revolution was won in CUBA?? Its not a matter of how many people are educated, its WHO is educated !

Severian

29th August 2005, 19:30

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 07:31 AM
To some certain extent I do agree with what you have said, but, what makes you think that this cannot happen under capitalism?
Because it hasn't. Anywhere. To nearly the extent it has in Cuba.

Even the U.S. doesn't have the kind of universal literacy Cuba has.

of course it can, So easily too ! look, if you look at all the aid that has been invested in third world countries it would make your jaw drop, worse of all where has this money has gone?

Exactly. The purpose of aid from the imperialist countries to the semicolonial countries is not development; it is to perpetuate dependency and imperialist domination. And as you point out, it's a business for a lot of these supposedly charitable organizations.

It's simply not in imperialism's interest to raise up fully developed economic competitors. And it's simply not in the interests of capitalism to educate working people to be able to wield political power!

Only a revolutionary government will want to do that. Only in the course of a revolution can the mass enthusiasm for learning be unleashed, which rapidly abolished illiteracy in Cuba, and and has since produced an amazingly high level of education in the Cuban population.

Poum_1936

31st August 2005, 15:55

The U.S. Hands Off Venezuela Campaign, San Francisco Labor Council, and Open World Conference have invited Stalin Perez Borges of the Venezuelan UNT (National Union of Workers) for a series of meetings in California between September 22 and October 2, 2005.

CONFIRMED EVENT:
Stalin Perez Borges will be speaking at ILWU Local 34 hall, 4 Berry St., SF, on Sunday Sept. 25th at 3 pm.

ILWU Local 34 Hall is located next door to SBC Park.
Use the "N" line of Muni toward SBC Park.
For more information about the event call
415-864-3537
[email protected]

http://www.ushov.org
http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org

chebol

2nd September 2005, 03:16

Australians Returned From Venezuela Condemn Evangelist Assassination Comments, Call For Terrorism Charges

The Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Network (AVSN) condemns comments by US right-wing evangelist Pat Robertson that the United States should assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, and condemns the refusal by the US government to censure the preacher and distance itself from his views.

Duroyan Fertl, from the AVSN and a participant in the first-ever Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Brigade, said, “The US government has been implicated in several recent illegal actions against the Venezuela, including the military coup in April 2002, and constantly uses aggressive rhetoric aimed at President Chavez, calling him a ‘destabilising force in the region.’

“The US should categorically and unconditionally state that it will not try to assassinate President Chavez, and it should also take legal action against Robertson. He has made an incitement to violence against a foreign head of state. If he were a muslim he would already be behind bars on terrorism charges.

“We also call on the Australian government to ban Robertson from this country for inciting murder and terrorism.

“Venezuela is one of the largest oil exporting countries in the world, but they spend the wealth on social welfare, not on waging war on innocents.” Fertl said. “The US sees this as a threat to it’s influence in the region, and access to cheap petroleum.

“During the Solidarity Brigade we saw first-hand the gains that the Venezuelan people have made since Chavez’ election, including free healthcare, education and housing, and workers’ and women’s rights. These social pillars, that are being eroded here, are regarded as a human right in Venezuela.”

Eyewitness reports from the first Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Brigade are scheduled in Sydney over the next few weeks, at which brigade participants will be sharing their experiences of the social transformations in Venezuela.

Major Reportback

2pm Sat September 3, 23 Abercrombie St, Chippendale

Nelson Davila, the new Venezuelan Consul to Australia will be speaking from 6pm. Davila will give a toast to the Venezuelan Bolivarian revolution, and will answer questions. Dinner and drinks will also be available. Entry will be $8/$6(conc).
UNSW: 1pm, Wed September 7, Quad Bldg, Room 1001.
UTS: 12 Noon, Thur September 8, Bldg 2, Level 5 Room 39
USyd: 1pm Thur September 8, Holme Bldg, Reading Room 1

For information or bookings, call

Duroyan 0403 919 377

or Katie 9690 1977

www.venezuelasolidarity.org

Levin

11th September 2005, 01:21

severian,

I've been away on vacation so I have not been able to write back to what you said. I am glad you agree with the points I have made because there are not a lot of people who feel that way about the revolution. Seeking education is the key to overthrow imperalism, but I still stand on the grounds that this can happen under the noses of imperalist countries.

It is very sad to come to the conclusion that charitable organizations treat themselves as every other business. Think about all the money that is being donated to Katrina, there is so little that will be given to the victims. but anyways thats another forum.

About the situation in venenzula, I think that if it keeps close to cuba they will become victims such as Iraq did. Every attempt at imperalism is a step closer to a revolution across the world. Life cannot be lived knowing the majority lives in poverty and lives through struggle.

guerrillero

17th September 2005, 10:55

What does Hugo Chavez plan to do when Fidel Castro dies? It is obious that the U.S. is just waiting for that day he dies so they can imperealise Cuba all over again.. Any ideas or thoughts on this?

FleasTheLemur

24th September 2005, 09:36

It's been stated by Castro that when he dies, Raul is going to replace him. Of course, Raul isn't a spring chicken either.

I can't give ya the answer to that question myself. If Cuba's democractic system is truely democratic, then there is a chance a new leader will rise to power and the Cuba people will defend themselves against the imperial forces at all cost. The BRV, meanwhile, would probably have to sit back and let it happen. If they was to try and defend Cuba, then there is no doubt that the U$ would claim some crazy argument and take the fight over to the BRV.

chebol

29th September 2005, 07:52

UN speech: Venezuela's Hugo Chavez slams Bush- abridged
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/644/644p28.htm

Interview with Nelson Davila, Venezuelan revolutionary and charge d’affaires at the Venezuelan embassy in Canberra.
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/644/644p17.htm

VENEZUELA: Challenges for the workers’ movement
Federico Fuentes, Valencia
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/644/644p18.htm

Speaking of the nine-month-long struggle against the Aseven (KR) soft-drink company, one of the company’s workers Luis Flugo told Green Left Weekly, “we have been on the streets, we have been the victims of so many acts of corruption. Many trade unions have gone through the same experience. But the workers have supported us in forming a new [trade union] leadership, because they want change — a radical change — so that we are the new administrators of the collective contract that is coming up, because the one we have now is useless. And the trade union we had was useless.”

Many other workers present at the meeting space of the National Union of Workers, Carabobo regional section (UNT-Carabobo) for a monthly meeting in August had similar stories. Barreto Nestor, a worker at Rudaveca, described their struggle to form a new union. “I have only been involved in the trade union movement for a few months but it has been a grand experience”, he said, adding that “there wasn’t a union in the factory when we formed this union”.

Nestor explained that “we say we are living in a real democracy, but there are still parts of the old democracy that remain. To form the union, we have to do it clandestinely and together, under the eye of the firm, hiding from the bosses because if they find us, although they are not [legally] able to fire us, they do. This is part of the reality we live in in Venezuela.”

The day after they formed the union, the workers were out on the street after the boss refused to negotiate with them. The workers organised a picket-line, which was attacked by armed gangs organised by the bosses. Together with the UNT and other unions, the workers responded with peaceful tactics and won their demands and back pay within one-and-a-half days.
New confidence

Venezuela’s Bolivarian revolution has created a resurgence in the confidence of workers to fight back and reclaim what is theirs. Previously, the trade union movement in Venezuela was dominated by the corrupt bureaucratic leadership of the Confederation of Venezuelan Workers (CTV). As many of the workers explained, the CTV has worked shoulder to shoulder with the bosses, treading on the rights of the workers.

Two important events helped to reshape the terrain of working-class struggle. Flugo explained, “If you do a survey of all the companies, in all of them are new groups of [unionists] that have sprouted, because they have won referendums, because the new laws [introduced by President Hugo Chavez’s government] protect them. That is what has helped take the blindfold off and see that [workers] can win their rights.” The new laws, which enable workers to hold referendums in their workplace to decide who will oversee their collective contract, has opened the space for a new layer of militants to rise up from the ranks.

All the unionists present at the UNT-Carabobo meeting space said they are very new to the trade union movement. Nestor said that the changes have meant that “a light has appeared in front of the workers”.

In many areas of private industry, there are problems with the functioning of the new laws. Many of the bosses and the old unions are not accustomed to having to deal with workers wanting to negotiate a better deal, and in many cases they have refused to talk to union representatives. Workers in this situation have been forced to strike for the right to bargain their collective contract. In the case of Aseven (KR), the old unions illegally held referendums that didn’t comply with the laws and constitution. “They would give workers a sheet to sign, pretending it was something different and when [the workers] were not careful, they would put a stamp on it saying they had voted and use that to relegitimise themselves”, said Rafael Gutierrez.

Nestor explained, “We still don’t say that everything is perfect. There are many of the old structures that have not been destroyed, because as we know, a revolution does not happen from one day to the next ... look at the nine-month struggle [at Aseven (KR)]. If we look at the law it shouldn’t last that long. There are things we need to improve but that is where we are at, and we continue to struggle.”

The second change has come from the experiences of the workers themselves in these struggles. A decisive turning point was the bosses’ lock-out, which began in December 2002. Many of the bosses shut down factories, including the state-owned company that controls Venezuela’s oil reserves (PDVSA), in order to create an economic crisis that could bring down the Chavez government. In response, workers moved in and began to take control of their factories, including restarting the oil and electrical sectors, which were crucial to breaking the back of the bosses’ lockout. After the CTV-backed lockout was defeated, militant unionists formed the UNT as a new federation.
Co-management

Through battle, many workers began to realise their power and their ability to play a role in running companies. With the initiation of co-management in a number of state-owned enterprises, as well as some closed down factories that have been taken over by workers and then expropriated under workers’ control, a discussion about co-management is beginning among workers. “We got together so that the workers themselves will have benefits; we had five years without benefits, working Monday to Monday. Now we have advanced in terms of [understanding] the laws, and the workers want to take over the factory for themselves, and I have to talk to them, holding them back so that all of us do it democratically and legally so that there are not mass firings and so that it is planned”, said Flugo.

According to Barreto Nestor, “Unless this capitalist system is transcended, the workers, regardless of the best collective contract signed, will not achieve our goals. We need to transcend capitalism, and co-management is part of that. It is giving power to the workers, power to us.”
Challenges

Despite some of the issues faced, the UNT has been able to make many advances against the bosses and the corrupt CTV in a short period of time. The struggle has taught workers many lessons, particular those new to the trade union arena. However, internally the UNT still faces some challenges. At an Andean regional meeting of the UNT in early July to prepare for the UNT national conference, national coordinator Marcela Maspeiro noted one key problem they face: There are still many unions not in the UNT and even more workers not in the unions. An even bigger challenge is how to relate to the over 50% of workers who are in the informal sector, and how the UNT can help to organise this sector.

Part of the problem of drawing in more unions is the fact that since the UNT’s inception, there have been battles against some bureaucratic tendencies within the UNT itself — union leaders who got involved in the UNT when they realised that the CTV was a sinking ship. One front for this battle is in SUTISS, the union that covers the strategic state-owned steel plant SIDOR. The current leadership of SUTISS, some of whom have positions in the national leadership of the UNT, are holding back internal elections for their own union.

Workers in the PDVSA have also talked of bureaucratic practices once again taking hold within the three different unions that cover this important sector. The fact that there are three unions, and talk of a fourth, within PDVSA also shows another issue that the workers’ movement faces. At the August regional meeting of the UNT in Carabobo, it was clear that there were a number of very intense disputes for coverage within workplaces between unions who are all affiliated to the UNT.

In general, a big challenge is to break the influence of some of the old culture of bureaucratism and squabbling for positions. The other problem is the connection of the workers’ movement, particularly the UNT, with other sectors of Venezuelan society. It was noticeable that the only discussions that took place at the regional meeting involved current industrial disputes and the internal functions of the UNT. No mention was made of any broader struggles or events in the community.

Another example is the lack of UNT presence at marches organised by other sectors, such as the march of campesinos from the countryside to the presidential palace on July 11. The march was directed against imperialism and the assassination of peasant leaders and for agrarian revolution — the war against the latifundista (large landowners), for unity from below, and for socialism, but the campesinos marched alone.

This problem has also been reflected in some of the issues faced with co-management. How to ensure that co-management does not simply become a change from private to collective control of the company wealth, but rather is socialised and put to the use of the entire community is something that has to be seriously debated in the movement. Already issues such as the disbanding of the union in INVEPAL, the paper factory that was expropriated and placed under workers’ control and is being run as a joint state-workers cooperative, has raised some questions as to the real aim of co-management. As more and more factories begin the process of co-management, the challenge will be to expand the focus of the movement and begin to integrate the community in these matters.

From Green Left Weekly, September 28, 2005.

Scottish_Militant

18th October 2005, 05:17

Ibero-American Summit Brings Benefits for Venezuela and Cuba (http://www.marxismonline.com/modules.php?name=ForumNews&id=412)

Caracas, free of illiteracy (http://www.marxismonline.com/modules.php?name=ForumNews&id=413)

Scottish_Militant

7th November 2005, 21:34

Workers Building a New Venezuela (http://www.marxismonline.com/modules.php?name=ForumNews&id=487)

FREEMIND1863

8th November 2005, 20:37

did anyone catch the hugo chavez address on c-span

Scottish_Militant

9th November 2005, 23:19

Some impressions from Venezuela (http://www.marxist.com/some-impressions-venezuela091105.htm)

Visiting Venezuela this young comrade has got a taste of the revolutionary fervour that is gripping the country. He has witnessed the masses taking part in political life, masses that have risen off their knees and are challenging capitalism and everything that it represents.

Venezuela - 2nd congress of the Revolutionary Socialist Youth held on November 5 and 6 (http://www.marxist.com/revolutionary-socialist-youth091105.htm)

Last weekend the Venezuelan Revolutionary Socialist Youth (JSR) held its second congress, where it adopted a clear platform in favour of socialist revolution. It aims to gather all the most conscious and militant youth of Venezuela under one banner.

The Monroe Doctrine, US Imperialism and Venezuela (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/monroe_doctrine_venezuela.htm)

This December marks the anniversaries of two of the most important documents of the United States ruling class’ imperialist policy. These documents epitomize the American imperialists’ paternalistic worldview, which they use to maintain their political and economic interests, and to expropriate the markets, raw materials and labor of the peoples of not only the western hemisphere but of the world. That is why the US Hands Off Venezuela Campaign is working with the Latin American Solidarity Coalition to get organizations and individuals to take up the call for a series of events around the anniversary.

New York: An Evening in Solidarity with Bolivarian Venezuela (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/new_york_evening_solidarity.htm)

On November 8, 2005 a remarkable event took place at New Yorks's Town Hall: An evening in solidarity with the Bolivarian Revolution, so far the biggest and most important gathering of this kind. The importance of the event was underlined by the fact that there was a lot of media present, ranging from the New York Times to alternative media and the Latinamerican TV station Telesur.

Scottish_Militant

17th November 2005, 15:01

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/images/people/nelson_mezerhane_p.jpg

Key Suspect in Venezuelan Prosecutor's Murder Turns Himself In (http://www.marxismonline.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=518)

Scottish_Militant

21st November 2005, 17:58

Venezuelan Legislator Says Anderson Murder Suspect Tried to Bribe Judge (http://www.marxismonline.com/modules.php?name=ForumNews&id=527)

alexidervin

2nd December 2005, 16:54

hi
im new
so whats the situation in venezuala??

Correa

4th December 2005, 05:56

For the past six years we have witnessed how, in the midst of great adversity, millions of Venezuelans have taken their destiny into their own hands and worked together to achieve the construction of a society rooted in the values of solidarity, democracy and social justice.

Strengthened by the Bolivarian Constitution –one of the most democratic in the world- the Venezuelan People have ratified this project in seven elections over the past six years. Nevertheless, an elite sector of society, with the support of the U.S. government and Venezuela’s private media, has repeatedly tried to derail Venezuela’s democratic process. They attempted a coup d’Etat in April 2002, that was reversed by the People of Venezuela who took to the streets armed only with their Constitution. In December 2002 they tried to sabotage the country’s oil industry, and succeeded in deeply damaging the Venezuelan economy. But the Venezuelan people, organized within their communities, once again prevailed.

Today, on the eve of the December 4th legislative elections, the minority opposition in Venezuela, unwilling to face a new political defeat, have cynically called for the withdrawal of its candidates claiming lack of confidence in Venezuela’s electoral authorities.

Despite the fact that recent elections in Venezuela have been characterized by an unprecedented level of transparency, attested repeatedly by international observers, the opposition conditioned its participation in the legislative elections on a new series of demands. However, once these demands were agreed to by the electoral authorities, the opposition abandoned its original commitment and withdrew from the elections with the goal of delegitimizing Venezuela’s institutions. This cynical move demonstrates once again that the Venezuelan opposition is prepared to undermine democracy and violate a people’s sovereign right to self-determination in its desperate gambit for power.

This new attempt to disrupt Venezuela’s democratic process has been tacitly supported by U.S. government officials who have publicly questioned the credibility of Venezuela’s electoral authorities.

We, friends of the Venezuelan people, reject this new attempt to sabotage democracy. We place our trust in Venezuela’s electoral authorities and in the Venezuelan people's will to defend their right to vote.

First 30 signatures:

João Pedro Stedile (Brazil)
Emir Sader (Brazil)
Jose Dirceu (Brazil)
Eduardo Galeano (Uruguay)
Bernard Cassen (France)
James Petras (USA)
Ignacio Ramonet (Spain)
Tariq Ali (Pakistan)
Atilio Borón (Argentina)
Samir Amin (Egypt)
Francois Houtart (Belgium)
Richard Gott (UK)
Fernando Morais (Brazil)
Jean-Pierre Chevenement (France)
Georges Sarre (France)
Sergio Lobo (Venezuela)
Robin Blackburn (UK)
Socorro Gomes (Brazil)
Vanessa Grazziotin (Brazil)
Carlos Lima (Brazil)
Sydnei Liberal (Brazil)
Paul-Emile Dupret (Belgium)
Rémy Herrera (France)
Valter Pomar (Brazil)
Ramon Chao (Spain)
Aminata Traore (Mali)
Michael Löwy (Brazil)
Leila Jinkings (Brazil)
To add your name please send an e-mail to [email protected]

Correa

6th December 2005, 05:54

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/images/logoVA2.jpg

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/images/people/jorge_rodriguez_p.jpg
CNE President Jorge Rodriguez, as he addressed the nation on TV.

Caracas, Venezuela, December 4, 2005—Chavez’s party, the Movement for the Fifth Republic (MVR), won 114 or 68% of the 167 seats in the new National Assembly, according to preliminary results that MVR deputy William Lara announced this evening. Pro-Chavez parties won all 167 seats in the new National Assembly.

The President of Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (CNE), Jorge Rodriguez, said that with 79% of the voting center results examined, voter turnout so far was at 25%. A total of 2.9 million votes had been counted so far, meaning that about 3.67 million Venezuelans cast ballots on Sunday.

The preparations, voting, and dismantling of the voting centers all proceeded normally, explained Rodriguez, with no incidents to speak of.

Many voting centers had to open late, though, because citizens who were asked to staff the centers did not show up, particularly in upper middle class neighborhoods, where the opposition parties that called for a boycott, are especially strong.

While Rodriguez did not say what percentage of the vote pro-Chavez parties and candidates got for the National Assembly, he did specify that for the Latin American parliament the six main pro-Chavez parties, MVR, Podemos, PCV, PPT, MEP, and UPV, won 88.8% of the vote.

That Chavez’s MVR party alone won 114 seats in the National Assembly, means that his party has slightly over the two thirds majority needed to make constitutional amendments and key appointments.

Earlier in the day, as it became clear that voter turn-out was lower than leaders of pro-government parties had predicted, several opposition leaders said that the new National Assembly would have no legitimacy. Maria Corina Machado, who is one of the directors of the opposition NGO Sumate, said, “From a pluri-party parliament we pass to a mono-party parliament that does not represent the broad sectors of the population. Today a National Assembly is born that is wounded in its legitimacy.”

MVR spokesperson William Lara contradicted this assessment, saying, “There are deputies from social groups, independent personalities. Today the Venezuelan people have elected a pluri-party National Assembly.”

Jesse Chacon, the Minister of the Interior and of Justice, also held a press conference, in which he argued that the last time parliamentary elections were held separately from presidential elections was in 1998. The party Acción Democrática (AD) won that vote, with the support of merely 11.24% of the total population registered to vote. During the 2000 parliamentary elections, Chavez’s MVR party received support from 17% of registered voters.

According to Chacon, any result in these elections where the MVR obtains support from more than 11% of those registered to vote would give the MVR greater legitimacy to control the National Assembly than AD had in 1998 and anything greater than 17% would give it greater legitimacy than the last National Assembly had. In accordance with such a calculation, the MVR coalition obtained the support of about 22% of all registered voters during this election (about 3 million votes out of 14 million registered voters).

Education Minister Aristobulo Isturiz explained on TV talk show that this type of calculation is the only calculation that makes sense for establishing a reference point because the several key opposition parties called for a boycott of today’s vote. In the course of the day, it was clear that opposition strongholds had extremely low turnout, of perhaps 10% of voters, while pro-Chavez neighborhoods saw much stronger participation.

CNE President Rodriguez cited another factor that influenced turnout today, besides the boycott, which was "severe" weather conditions in several states, including the capital, which made voting more difficult than usual.

Doshka

9th December 2005, 01:12

Sorry but is there a debate or are you just posting articles on Chavez?

Correa

9th December 2005, 02:22

More of a discussion rather than a debate. Posting articles helps the process.

Scottish_Militant

12th December 2005, 06:55

Indeed, this thread is primarily for the sharing of information.

Zeitgeizt

21st December 2005, 07:41

Comrades why on earth are you listening to Alan Woods when you can be listening directly to Hugo Chavez?

Best book I've read in years...[FONT=Courier]

http://www.monthlyreview.org/venezuelanrevolution.htm

UNDERSTANDING THE VENEZUELAN REVOLUTION

Hugo Chávez Talks to Marta Harnecker
by Hugo Chávez and Marta Harnecker

Comrade Woods is an amateur in comparison to Marta Harnecker.

Translated by Chesa Boudin

“Marta Harnecker s important book helps clarify the challenges facing Venezuela’s ongoing revolutionary process. The bourgeoisie still controls the economy, the media, the judiciary, and many elected bodies. Additionally, the middle classes which formerly enjoyed an orgy of spending financed by oil money, have now converted from previous nationalist attitudes into allies of imperialism. The decisive role played by Hugo Chavez in initiating that revolutionary process and the immense support he continues to receive from the popular classes makes this book necessary reading for understanding the forces at work in what may well become a stage in the long run transformation of the global system.”—SAMIR AMIN

“Marta Harnecker's penetrating questions brings out the profundity of Hugo Chávez's intelligence and his sense of commitment —as well as his sense of humor. This book is indispensable for understanding the revolutionary process in Venezuela.” —SAUL LANDAU, author of The Business of America and The Pre-Emptive Empire: A Guide to Bush's Kingdom

“This well-crafted, well-edited, and engaging book is a bracing antidote and a pleasure to read. Here you will discover the real Hugo Chávez: a highly educated, brilliant, democratic revolutionary leader, and a man of deep and thoroughly admirable humanity.” —MICHAEL PARENTI, author of The Assassination of Julius Caesar, Superpatriotism, and The Culture Struggle

Marta Harnecker’s interviews with Hugo Chávez began soon after one of the most dramatic moments of Chávez’s presidency—the failed coup of April 2002, which ended with Chávez restored to power by a massive movement of protest and resistance. In the aftermath of the failed coup, Chávez talks to Harnecker about the formation of his political ideas, his aspirations for Venezuela, its domestic and international policies, problems of political organization, relations with social movements in other countries, and more, constantly relating these to concrete events and to strategies for change.

The exchange between Harnecker and Chávez—sometimes reflective, sometimes anecdotal, always characterized by their passionate commitment to the struggles of the oppressed—brings to light the process of thought and action behind the public pronouncements and policies of state.

The interviews are supplemented by extracts from Chávez’s most recent pronouncements on the ongoing transformation in Venezuela and Latin America, an analysis by Harnecker on the role of the military, and a chronology.

Hugo Chávez has become a symbol of defiance of U.S. imperialism throughout Latin America. His importance for the future of the region makes this book essential reading.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments
Introduction
Chapter One:Roots
Chapter Two: A Peaceful Transition, A Painful Institutional Birth
Chapter Three: The Military in the Revolution and the Counterrevolution
Chapter Four: The Slow March Toward an Alternative Economy
Chapter Five: Sovereign and Independent International Policy
Chaper Six: The Middle Class, Communications Strategy, and Dialogue
Chapter Seven: A Political Party at its Height
Chapter Eight: The April 11 Coup

About the Authors
HUGO CHÁVEZ was elected president of Venezuela in 1998, re-elected under a new constitution in 2000, and won a large majority in a 2004 recall referendum.

MARTA HARNECKER is director of the Center for Research on Popular Memory in Latin America (MEPLA) in Havana and author of Venezuela: Militares Junta al Pueblo and numerous books on the Latin American left.

If you have any technical comments or suggestions, about this web site, please send e-mail to Renee Pendergrass at [email protected]

http://www.monthlyreview.org/venezuelanrevolution.htm

People's Coalition

21st December 2005, 21:33

I think Chavez is doing one hell of a job as The President of Venezuela. I believe that Venezuela, in my eyes, is going to become the next great socialist state.

Keep on Rockin Chavez!

Correa

22nd December 2005, 03:38

Woods is a Marxist-Leninist not my exact cup of tea, but the man does offer great insight. Who is this other person you speak of? I'm not to familiar with our British Comrades.

Zeitgeizt

23rd December 2005, 05:07

Again comrades don't miss this book. It really does away with dogma...

Best book I've read in years...[FONT=Courier]

http://www.monthlyreview.org/venezuelanrevolution.htm

UNDERSTANDING THE VENEZUELAN REVOLUTION

Hugo Chávez Talks to Marta Harnecker
by Hugo Chávez and Marta Harnecker

bolshevik butcher

24th December 2005, 23:42

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2005, 03:38 AM
Woods is a Marxist-Leninist not my exact cup of tea, but the man does offer great insight. Who is this other person you speak of? I'm not to familiar with our British Comrades.
Well actually he's a trotskyist.

Correa

24th December 2005, 23:46

Yeah that too. I guess he is a Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyist.

bolshevik butcher

25th December 2005, 00:05

yeh, well trotskyist tend to like the works of marx, lenin and trotksy. Well happy christmas!

CommunismForever

31st December 2005, 00:27

Things seem to be moving kind of slowly with the transition to Socialism in Venezuela.(although I know life has improved for many people since Chavez came to power) Is this because of in depth planning or because the Venezuelan people havent been convinved enough of the benefit of living in a Socialist Society?
Do you think there needs to be 'Red Guard' groups organised like Mao Zedong did to educate the public about Socialism?

redstar2000

31st December 2005, 05:21

Another view from Venezuela...

WSF Caracas: Shroud for Venezuela’s social movements (http://nyc.indymedia.org/en/2005/12/62655.html)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

Re-visionist 05

5th January 2006, 23:27

Progress is progress, even if it dosnt go as well as id like it too, it'll still provide inspiration to future generations in latin america, and it lets the world know that Marxism is not yet dead, and is on the rise once more.

As for American intervention, its doubtful we will; a move like that is far too risky to our already fragile reputation with the other countries in the Western Heimisphere, the last thing our government and companies want is sanctions from the countries that provide us with many of our inports. America has no way to sustain itself without its large force of unskilled, and exploitable laboreres.

chuq

2nd March 2006, 21:50

Venezuela is doing fine and neighboring countries are following suit--socialists are in power in Chile, Bolivia and other countries are leaning in that direction.

It seems that Lenin's idea of uninterrupted revolution is coming of age in Latin America. Whereas socialism takes hold in one country and is supported when trying establish itself in others. Cuba is acting as a unifying force for now.

If things keep goning well in Latin America then it is possibly aid the fight for socialism in the US.

Bannockburn

7th March 2006, 04:45

a recent email. Thought I share.

Dear Global Justice Activists,

Global Exchange brought a delegation of almost 200 people to participate in the World Social Forum in Venezuela in January. As we grow increasingly concerned about US intervention in Venezuela, we are reminded about why the Bush Administration is so aggressive towards this country, because: “the Administration’s concerns about Venezuela...relate to a deeper concern about the erosion of support for the neoliberal “free market” system promoted by the US government in Latin America for decades."

US Intervention in Venezuela

by Medea Benjamin
March 4, 2006
http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print....s06/0304-20.htm (http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views06/0304-20.htm)

It never ceases to amaze me, in the middle of the massive failure of the war on Iraq, that the Bush administration still has time to mess up our relations with other countries. Yet it seems like that’s exactly what they’re doing with our neighbor Venezuela.

Last month, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld compared Hugo Chávez to Hitler, noting that “He’s a person who was elected legally — just as Adolf Hitler was elected legally — and then consolidated power and now is, of course, working closely with Fidel Castro and Mr. Morales and others.” The assault was timed to push the celebrations marking the 7th anniversary of the Chávez government off the front page of the opposition-controlled media in Venezuela.

In early February, Venezuela expelled the US military attaché in Caracas when he was caught red-handed bribing Venezuelan officers for military secrets. Instead of admitting to the spying, the US “retaliated” by expelling the Venezuelan Ambassador’s chief of staff.

Then on February 16th, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice chimed in with her sharpest criticisms yet of Venezuela, remarking at a Congressional hearing that Chávez is a leading a "Latin brand of populism that has taken countries down the drain.” She then urged a “united front” against Chávez, remarking that "the international community has just got to be much more active in supporting and defending the Venezuelan people.”

These comments are not new, but follow a pattern of increasing hostility and verbal aggression towards Venezuela. Rice’s concerns are allegedly based on her argument that Chávez isn’t a democrat, despite having won three elections.

But according to the 2005 survey by Latinobarómetro, an independent polling firm, Venezuelans are more likely than citizens of 18 other Latin American nations polled to describe their government as “totally democratic.” And Venezuelans have the second highest level of satisfaction with the way their own democracy functions. In addition, recent independent polls show President Chávez holding an approval rating of over 70% - a number that our president could only dream of. While there are policies in Venezuela, like in all countries, that people could certainly question or disagree with, the administration’s aggressive behavior towards Venezuela is totally unreasonable and violates that nation’s sovereignty. So why is the Bush administration so antagonistic towards Venezuela’s democratically elected government?

To answer this question, I recommend a report entitled “US Intervention in Venezuela, A Clear and Present Danger,” written recently by Venezuela expert Deborah James, formerly of Global Exchange, and available on our website at http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/am...VZrelations.pdf (http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/americas/venezuela/USVZrelations.pdf). The report tells a shocking tale of US intervention in Venezuela’s democratic process, examines a series of myths about Venezuela, and offers an explanation of the real concerns underlying the Bush administration’s antagonism towards Venezuela. Fortunately, it also offers US citizens some concrete ways we can get involved.

US Intervention: A Documented Fact, Not Allegations

According to the report, since 2002 the Bush administration has embarked upon a new strategy each year to oust and/or destabilize the democratically elected government of Venezuela. In 2002, the US Administration supported a military coup that briefly ousted the democratic government; in 2003 it used an economic sabotage campaign; in 2004 it supported the political strategy of the referendum; and in 2005 it waged a diplomatic battle.

Many of the US destabilization tactics parallel the maneuvers used against progressive governments such as Chile in 1973, including massive financial and other support to develop an oppositional civil society and shape and unify political party opposition; a media campaign against the government designed to impugn the government and create a sense of instability; and illegal espionage activities.

In 2002, the Bush administration knew that a coup against Chavez was in the offing before it happened, including the fact that dissident military officers would “try to exploit unrest stemming from opposition demonstrations slated for later this month or ongoing strikes at the state-owned oil company PDVSA.” They also knew about the coup in advance because the US government was funding many of the groups that took part in the coup. In fact, grants by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and USAID to opposition groups skyrocketed right before the coup.

To this day, Bush Administration officials routinely deny their involvement in the coup, in spite of official US documents that prove otherwise. But the truth is widely known in Venezuela, and forms the basis for the antagonism that plagues the US-Venezuela relationship. To be fair, Chávez engages in regular verbal tirades again Bush and Rice which overreach presidential diplomacy. But imagine how the US government would treat a foreign government that had financed domestic groups that participated in a coup against the US government…

Instead of abating in the post-coup period, US government collusion with anti-democratic forces continued during the following year. Groups such as NED and USAID actually continued to fund groups that had participated in the coup. This includes some groups that organized an insurrectionary managers’ strike at the end of 2002 and beginning of 2003 that cost the Venezuelan economy about $10 billion, resulting in a severe economic contraction and putting millions of workers and thousands of small businesses out of their jobs. The strikers’ goal was maintaining control over the national oil company so they could keep the wealth to themselves, and getting Chávez out of office. They lost, and Venezuela’s oil wealth now benefits the entire country instead of a traditional elite.

In 2004, I witnessed the referendum in Venezuela, which had been organized by the opposition as a way to get Chávez out of office legally (after so many illegal attempts had failed.) Here the US was active in demanding that the referendum take place, whether or not the legal criteria had been met. The NED even financed the opposition’s political platform! In the end, Chávez won the referendum in a landslide of 59% in a process that was certified as free and fair by the Carter Center and the Organization of American States (OAS).

The next year, both Rice and Rumsfeld toured Latin America, urging leaders there to criticize Venezuela in an attempt to isolate Chávez in the region. In her confirmation hearings in January 2005, the Rice named Chávez a “negative force in the region.” Fortunately, many regional leaders have rejected the pressure, including Brazil’s Lula, Uruguay’s Vazquez, Chile’s Lagos and even Colombia’s Uribe.

Though the extensive exposés about US government meddling in the internal affairs of Venezuela have raised a furor within Venezuela, US officials still not only deny involvement, but under the guise of supporting democracy they have actually expanded support for opposition groups, including groups that have refused to accept the results of the democratic referendum of 2004.

Myths and Facts: What is Really Happening in Venezuela

Since all of Venezuela’s elections - in which an overwhelming majority of citizens have voted for Chávez or his governing coalition - have been certified as free and fair by international monitors, US officials have turned to accusing Chávez of “being democratically elected but governing undemocratically.” Yet Venezuelans resoundingly approve of their democracy, and are experimenting with innovative ways to build participatory democracy in addition to the representative form. A detailed analysis of Venezuelan democracy is available in the report. It’s also ironic that this accusation should come from a US administration that has usurped unprecedented presidential power.

Another basic myth is that Chávez has limited freedom of speech and eroded civil rights. Yet whenever I go to Venezuela, I hear the private media spend enormous amounts of time criticizing the President, something I wish our media would do a little more of. Access to community media production – both radio and television – has vastly expanded in recent years. And no serious human rights group has alleged that civil rights have eroded under the Chávez administration, and civil rights compare favorably to past governments and to countries in the region.

Then there’s the accusation that Chávez is mismanaging the economy, nationalizing businesses and turning Venezuela’s economy into a “Castro-style Cuba.” Yet Venezuela is one of the fastest growing countries in the region. Per capita income growth was a whopping 17.9% in 2004, when the economy rebounded from the opposition’s economic sabotage, and continued to grow 9% last year as well. And while it’s true that most of this growth is due to the skyrocketing price of oil, the government is making great efforts to diversify the economy.

One of the most ridiculous assertions common to Ms. Rice is that Chávez is a “negative force in the region.” Venezuela has initiated an impressive array of programs to support Latin American and Caribbean nations, from supplying low-cost fuel to starting a new regional television channel, to buying bonds to help stabilize Argentina’s economy.

Venezuelans find the US government’s completely unsubstantiated assertion that their government supports terror the most absurd, especially coming from a country that not only illegally invaded Iraq, but is also harboring Luis Posada Carriles, a terrorist who escaped from jail in Venezuela after the 1973 bombing of a Cuban plane that killed 76 people. In a maddening double standard, the US has thus far refused to extradite Posada to Venezuela, for alleged fears that he will be “tortured.”

But the administration seems to overstep the bounds of rationality in its attempts to stoke fears that Chávez is about to cut off oil supplies to the US. Venezuela provides about 15% of US oil consumption, and is far more democratic than close US allies like Saudi Arabia by any stretch. It’s true that Chávez has threatened to cut off oil supplies to the United States – but only if the US invades Venezuela, or attempts to assassinate Chávez. Since US officials have repeatedly denied those intentions, what are they so concerned about?

The only change in Venezuelan oil supply to the US in the past three years has been this year’s program to provide 40% discounts on 49 million gallons of heating fuel for poor people in Massachusetts, Maine, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware, and soon Vermont and Connecticut. How bizarre that Texas Republican Congressman Joe Barton has launched an investigation into this humanitarian offering, instead of investigating the US multinational oil companies that posted over $100 billion in corporate profits last year due to soaring gasoline prices.

So Really, Why Does Chávez Make them so Crazy?

As “US Intervention in Venezuela” makes clear, the Administration’s concerns about Venezuela are not fundamentally about these issues but relate to a deeper concern about the erosion of support for the neoliberal “free market” system promoted by the US government in Latin America for decades. The Chávez government is currently leading one of the fastest growing economies in the region, bringing down unemployment through the use of a dynamic set of policies that combine the assets of the private sector with, strategic government investment in specific industries, and incentives for cooperatives and small and local businesses.

Most importantly, the Chávez administration is funneling billions of dollars of the country’s oil wealth into social programs for the poor. These programs have succeeded in eradicating illiteracy in Venezuela; vastly increasing school enrollment; providing subsidized food and housing to the poor; and implementing a national system of preventative, community-based health care. Call it the threat of a good example!

In addition, the concerns of the Bush Administration stem from Chávez’s promotion of regional integration, because it interferes with the US attempts to impose the failed model of corporate globalization embedded in projects like the stalled Free Trade Area of the Americas, the top US priority in Latin America for the past decade.

But one of the most interesting hypotheses in the report is the notion that the fundamental antagonism between the US and Venezuela stems from the tension between the imperial designs of the Bush administration and an underlying goal of the entire Venezuelan project: a change in the global balance of power from a “uni-polar” world dominated by US economic and strategic interests, to a “multi-polar” world of real economic and political independence for the global South.

This helps put in perspective Venezuela’s recent decision to support Iran in the International Atomic Energy Association, because Iran is an historic ally of Venezuela in the building of OPEC decades ago (when the countries first came together to ensure that oil producing nations shared in some of the oil wealth along with the oil multinationals.) It also explains the increasing diversification of Venezuela’s foreign relations, deepening its alliances in Latin American and the Caribbean but also reaching out to China, Russia, and Spain.

And it explains why team Bush seem so irrationally focused on antagonizing an economic ally and democratic neighbor: in essence, because of the neocons’ unwavering ideological commitment to a corporate-oriented global economy dominated by US strategic interests. Chávez seeks to challenge that vision, and build a more balanced geopolitical map. And to the chagrin of the Bush administration, his vision has met with tremendous support both within Latin America and globally.

Where Do We Go From Here

The facts outlined in this report point to the need for a rethinking of US-Venezuela relations. They call out for a shift to a policy based on both the US and Venezuela’s shared economic interests, and respect for each country’s sovereignty and democracy.

A good start is learning about what’s really happening in Venezuela. Good resources include www.venezuelanalysis.com and www.venezuelafoia.info. The Venezuela Information Office offers a concise weekly listserve at www.rethinkvenezuela.org. Better yet, go and see for yourself. Check out Global Exchange’s amazing travel opportunities to Venezuela at http://www.globalexchange.org/tours/byCountry.html#100003.

In addition, you can promote more balanced coverage of Venezuela in the US press by writing letters to the editor and urging your local paper to be truly “fair and balanced.”. And if you buy gas, you can support Venezuela’s distributive oil policies by buying from the Venezuela-owned company Citgo. To find a local Citgo station, go to www.citgo.com/CITGOLocator.jsp.

Most important will be our collective efforts to pressure the Bush administration to steer a new course with Venezuela. This is unlikely to happen without concerted pressure from Congress, and congresspeople are only going to go out on a limb if they hear from their constituents. Especially crucial at this time is fighting House Resolution 328, introduced by Florida Republican Connie Mack, intended to condemn the government of Venezuela for all of the myths debunked in the report.

Let’s not let our government commit another grave error of “regime change”. Let’s act now to demand respect for Venezuela’s duly elected government, before it’s too late.

-------------------------------------

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of Global Exchange, a San Francisco-based human rights organization and CODEPINK: Women for Peace. She has traveled several times to Venezuela, most recently for the World Social Forum, and is reachable at [email protected]

redsoldier32

29th March 2006, 02:01

the bush admin is intervening in venzuela? what else is new? oh and i know this venezuelan who is against chavez, go figure

McLeft

26th April 2006, 19:10

If South America ever united as one sovereign nation, and if Chavez were a presidential candidate i'd sure vote for him. I have more respect for Chavez, than for my country's own leader.

KampfdemKapital

27th April 2006, 19:01

Austrian Solidarity Page:
http://venezuela-info.net/

I have spoke with the "President of outhern affairs" (sorry if this term is not korrekt, i am from austria and dont speak english very good) from Venezuela. He is a very cool man :) He tell us much about the situation in Venezuela und the progress of the revolution. When you are interesstet i maybe will tell more about this discussion.

mrg
KdK

Zacarias

8th June 2006, 07:07

Hi all,

New here and came to this site through a link. I wrote this article a year ago and it still is very much valid today. I'm venezuelan living in Venezuela, not a communist but a supporter of the Bolivarian Revolution and the integration of Latin America. Hope you dig the article.

By Zack Krasuk
2/15/2005 - Updated: 2/24/2005

In Defense of the Revolution

Prelude

Large political and socio economic changes in a third world country do not happen when things are complacent and well for the masses. Neither was this the case with Venezuela. In December 6, 1998, Hugo Chávez of the MVR Party (Movimiento de la Quinta República—Movement of the Fifth Republic) won the presidential election by a whopping 56.2%, one of the largest majority of votes attained in the history of Venezuela and breaking the pattern of a two party political system that offered little practical variation at all for the previous 40 years. Indeed, the election of 1998 marked a new and brighter beginning for Venezuela and its citizens.

Chavez had long fought for the rights of his people. To fully understand the political situation of this South American country we must look back a little over a decade.

A lieutenant colonel, Chavez rose up in a failed coup attempt on February 4th, 1992 against then President Carlos Andrés Pérez (CAP) who had implemented years of failed laissez-faire capitalist austerity programs dictated by the IMF. This IMF austerity program was appropriately called "The Washington Consensus", since CAP had close ties with the neo cons and businessmen of the Bush Senior administration. The trade-off for the IMF's austerity plan imposed on Venezuela would be a loan for 4.5 billion Dollars. The austerity programs included cuts in social programs, thus leaving hospitals without sufficient medicines and with time jails overcrowded to the extent that they no longer were suitable for humans, with rats and other animals and insects living alongside the prisoners.

I remember clearly while living in Venezuela then, that women in public hospitals such as Pérez de León would give birth in metal desks covered with a sheet. A line would form and women would have to wait their turn. Such was the state of decay of the public services in 1992.1, 2 CAP tried to stem off the growing inflation by cutting on spending, one of the facets of laissez faire capitalism that was proven flawed and ineffective throughout history by Keynesian economics.

The Reagan administration did it and it led to an economic crash in the late 80's, the Hoover administration did it and was one of the factors that led to the Great Depression. Indeed laissez faire or supply economics produced disasters during the Hoover, Reagan, Nixon, and Bush administrations. Due to deficient investments on the government's behalf on the economy, no jobs were created that could produce and give back to the economy and cash flow began to decrease dramatically. 3 Massive protests against CAP occurred due to his lack of concern for the poor majority; the police response was brutal and 16 people were initially said to have been killed and hundreds injured in the protests which became known as The Caracazo. Years later, it was known that CAP's government had taken measures to purposely hide the number of dead reported, so the exact number will never be known. A current official estimate places the number at 277 people killed by the police. CAP's government survived Chávez's coup but not for long, soon after he was tried and found guilty of corruption charges and impeached from office.

With the help of the American government and corrupt businessmen inside Venezuela, CAP was able to flee to Miami before he could be jailed; an interim President was chosen in Congress. In the meantime, Chavez remained imprisoned for several years before he was pardoned by then-President Rafael Caldera in 1994. Under Caldera, the extreme capitalist system instituted by CAP was lessened but the aging president did little to alter the course of the economy, which was crippled and inflation continued to be at 70%, thus continuing to leave more and more Venezuelans in poverty. As a result, the once-peaceful country began to have a gigantic surge in crime. The poor began to resort to illegal means in order to sustain many of their families, since inflation literally ate up anything you could possibly earn. 1, 5, 24

The Rise of the Social Democracy

Since his release from jail, Chavez began his political career and from the onset he declared that his goal would be to give the bulk of the Venezuelan population, namely the poor, a fair chance at life and giving them the tools necessary to maintain a dignified standard of living. Just like Venezuela's founding father, Simón Bolívar, Chávez's main concern was to improve the life of the masses. Chávez named his political movement La Revolucion Bolivariana (the Bolivarian Revolution). Indeed, unlike most other so-called leftist democratic leaders of South America, Chávez actually did keep his word; he did not use the leftist platform to just get to power. The two party system that Venezuela had before the MVR came to power, claimed to be both "Social Democratic" parties, yet they did absolutely nothing in accordance to what the term in political science signifies.

In political science, Social Democracy means a form of government where people not only have freedom to choose their candidates as they will but also the government is there to ensure a basic standard of living for the masses. It is often the case in South America that presidents come and go and nothing at all changes, other than the fact that people are left poorer than before. Decades of unrestrained laissez-faire capitalism in conjunction with a predominantly rightist Catholic view that glorified the white race took its toll on entire peoples in the region. The poor would be left out and voting in Venezuela before Chavez was done by giving them handouts of sugar, cornmeal and other basic necessities so that they would vote for the party of whoever gave them the handout.

Behind the curtains and the façade the filthy rich and the American government carefully constructed things in such a way so that the poor would remain ignorant and little more than pack mules, with no aspirations and no understanding of the world around them; they would live to work 12 hours a day only to go home, eat, and sleep all in decrepit conditions at best. This, according to the Conservative US agenda suited them well enough, since the poor would have no aspirations and by having no aspirations, no fear would exist in the continent of a come-back of Socialism or even more progressive political beliefs. Instituting conformity in the minds of the masses was the key to suppressing them and maintaining the endless cycle of master-slave relationship created between foreign corporations and the local poor.

After winning the elections in 1998, Chávez immediately set to work to diversify Venezuela's trade routes where better benefits could be made for the Venezuelan people. This of course upset businessmen in Washington because their regular milking cow was now refusing to accept deals that were questionable in terms of equal share. Venezuela would now only accept trade deals that were according to the market's terms and not those done under subterfuge or blackmail from foreign corporations. Oil was a factor as well since the US depends heavily on Venezuela's exports and Chávez began to make trade with other countries that were not kosher with US foreign policies such as Cuba and Iran.

Heavy internal investments occurred as well to further make Venezuela more self-sufficient in basic manufactured goods. Taxes began to be strictly enforced for the first time since the dictatorship of Marcos Pérez Jimenez came to an end in 1958. Corruption, especially at the level of large businesses began to decrease due to the enforcement of the law, which was costing Venezuela millions in losses. Duties on foreign imports began to be enforced, once again, enraging foreign investors who had gotten used to the idea of dealing with a Banana Republic that had no duties, nor real taxes. Minimum worker safety conditions began to be enforced as well and laws were passed giving Indians and other minorities more autonomy over their lands, especially the Guajiro Indians who had for decades been humiliated as "indios brutos" ("idiot Indians") by the pseudo democracies that were in power before Chávez. This humiliation of the natives was fully condoned by the Catholic Church, foreign evangelical churches (like American Baptists) and other institutions of the right wing. In fact, much of the friction between the current government and right-wing Christians as a whole revolves around the fact that these "missionaries" abuse their welcome and usually try at all costs to force their beliefs upon those of the natives.

Indeed, it's the first time ever in Venezuela's history that the rich cultural heritage of that land is appreciated and fomented monetarily by the government. The government's plan to expand cultural awareness of native culture and give equal opportunity to minorities, including Venezuelans of African descent is unprecedented since historically, in Venezuela, lighter skinned individuals held the power in most spheres of life, especially in the economy, the military, and the seats of government.

The government's new stance in favor of women's rights has also sparked friction with the Vatican and Christian conservatives. In a culture where men are supposed to be the ones talking for the family as part of the standard set by machismo, giving women more power is a very real danger to the right wing and the Church which still to this day proclaims that sexual intercourse is for the strict purpose of procreation, hence condoms are bad and that native beliefs are against Jesus Christ.

Chávez's government has created day cares in the major cities so that working single moms can have someone to look after their children while they bring the bread home. After school programs have been created so that kids obtain help for schoolwork and participate in sports. New technical schools are being created so that the poor can have better training and earn a more decent wage. Chávez's emergence has created a major boost to the once-crippled Venezuelan economy.

Those of you who simply want to "look at the numbers", by all means, let us do so. In 2004, Venezuela's Gross National Product increased by an unprecedented 16 to 18 %, sources varying but all in the aforementioned range. According to the UN's Economic Commission for the Caribbean and South America, Venezuela was the country that experienced the largest economic growth of the entire region in 2004. Inflation continues to be a problem at 17% but since 1998 there has been a whopping 50% decrease in the inflation rate, thus the value of the Venezuelan currency is strengthening. Overall average income rose by 20% since Chávez entered office. Growth of public services went up by 30% in 2004 alone.

The private sector and investment also experienced an extensive growth of 8%. The government has also used its money to pay off the long-standing foreign debt, thus strengthening the Venezuelan economy. These are simple and pure facts that cannot be argued over. There are several reasons for this new economic growth, amongst them is the fact that much needed funds are being poured into the economy to stimulate cash flow and putting the wheels into motion once again.

In the Y = G + tT + C + I + EX - IMP, curve, increasing government spending (G) into things that increase the overall standard of living, increases Y (overall economic income). Increasing G, leads to an increase in consumption © since consumers have more means to do so, and in turn by more money being in the hands of the people, more investors have enough confidence to put their money (I) in banks and other financial institutions. Since the tax function (tT) is being enforced by the government, more income (Y) is produced as well; additionally, waste and corruption are decreased thus leading to more money as well. Exports (EX) accounted for 25.8 billion dollars, whereas imports (IM) accounted for only 10.7 billion dollars, meaning that Venezuela had for the year 2004 a positive trade balance surplus of 15.1 billion dollars; by government spending (G) having created more national industries, more manufactured goods were made and fewer foreign goods were bought, hence making Venezuela less dependent on foreign consumer goods. This has mostly hurt large American companies, since before Chávez, Venezuela ran red numbers (meaning negative numbers) in the trade surplus in manufactured goods; indeed depended on the US in things as basic as tires and shoes, whereas now, these are all nationally produced. This is the basics of Keynesian economics, namely mixed market economics (both government and private) which throughout history has proven itself to be more effective in countering the effects of recessions than free market policies.

Even news-sources such as AFP and Reuters and their economists admit that Venezuela's current economic growth is unprecedented and is bound to continue, facts that cartoons such as The Wall Street Journal and other right-wing mouthpieces try to discredit or belittle. The New York Times and the Washington Post, although decidedly anti-Chávez, have been forced to swallow their pride and admit that Chávez's policies have prompted economic growth in Venezuela. Additionally, the government has set itself a series of environmental goals such as fomenting tourism and opening up water treatment plants to establish a minimum standard for industrial pollution controls. Amongst the largest water treatment plants funded and opened by the government was the one at El Maguey in 2003.

Probably one of the aspects of Chávez's government that has angered the ultra rich was his land-reforms. The uppermost 1.5% of Venezuela's rich owned 90% of the land before Chávez came to power. Among these private properties were lands that were idle and were arable, meaning they could be converted to farmlands and give people jobs and increase internal food production. Chávez proposed a law in the National Assembly (Congress) to put all idle lands to use and the law passed by the approval of the majority of seats in the Assembly. He gave the rich the following proposal: put your idle lands to use by hiring people to work on them or sell them to us within a year. Note that a year is quite a lot of time to start hiring people to work on those lands. By hiring people to work on the lands, the landlords would get a share of what the peasants produced and at the same time the peasants would have a job, instead of making their living through crime.

The rich landlords however, thinking that Chávez would not dare enforce the newly enacted law, didn't do anything. The government's response was to take those lands. The government then proceeded to get people out of the slums, teach them how to tend crops, and gave them the lands that they had expropriated from the rich. In essence, the landlords had it coming, because Chávez had been more than fair in his proposal to them; in their anger because their social influence and political power was beginning to be inconsequential, they began to use all their financial power to try to bring down Chávez. In the end the ones benefiting from the land reform law are the poor and the jobless; with the enactment of this law, crime has been reduced since fewer people have to resort to theft to feed their families. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 17, 18, 19

US Intervention and Violation of a Country's Sovereignty

One can only ask who would be dissatisfied with the current path that Venezuela has taken with the new Social Democracy created by Chávez? The corrupt, the thieves, those who profited from the previous corruption, those who are against expanding social rights, those with close allegiance to Bush and the Washington neo cons, and finally, last but not least, the current conservative government of Colombia and its sympathizers. Among the opposition is Chavez's old enemy, CAP. CAP is currently utilizing the money, which he stole from Venezuela's oil revenues during his years in the presidency to foment protests and acts of sabotage against Chavez's government with full approval of the Bush Junior administration.

It is interesting to note that under international laws, the US is technically forced to extradite CAP, but due to that man's good ties with the conservative businessmen of the US (which span over a decade), he has evaded justice and currently lives a comfortable life in New York. When the United States committed war crimes in Afghanistan, Venezolana de Television, the state owned news network, showed crystal clear pictures of children that had been killed by B-52 cluster bombings.

The US government vehemently denied it had killed children with the indiscriminate bombings of villages throughout Afghanistan, even in the face of crystal clear evidence. From that day on, Venezuela became an enemy to the eyes of the neo cons in the US. By stating the truth and not silently agreeing with what the Bush administration did, Chávez became to be labeled as a "Communist"—the key word to condemning someone as a black sheep.

It is highly amusing to see someone being labeled a Communist, while allowing complete freedom of expression. Like friends and acquaintances of both the right and left who live in Venezuela tell me, you open a newspaper in Caracas and chances are you may find an editorial poking fun at Chávez. Likewise in TV and the Radio. If that is not democracy then what is? So you're automatically a Communist if you show the world the truth about what is going on because you deny those very facts? According to the American neo cons and the Venezuelan opposition, that seems to be the case. Also, Chávez expressed his fraternal support for the Palestinian people and publicly stated that Israel committed terrorist acts against Palestinian children. Once again, this was another reason to anger the right wing politicians both within Venezuela, the US and Israel.

Add these "transgressions" to Chávez's social plans and the fact that he wants poor people to read and write, and that is it, Washington came a second away from proclaiming Venezuela to be part of the "Axis of Evil". It did not however, out of fear that Chávez would cut the oil flux to the US and instead redirect all of its supply to China or Europe. The Bush administration and its friends had something more dishonorable in mind: a coup against Chávez to overthrow the democratically elected president and to institute a right wing dictatorial government that was in favor of US commercial and foreign policies.

In international law it is a criminal act for any given country to interfere in the domestic affairs of any other country. This particular criminal act occurred on April 12th, 2002, about a year before the US invasion of Iraq. Around 3 am that day a sector of the military took over all means of communication in the country and announced that Chávez had resigned and that businessman Pedro Carmona, head of the right wing economic group FEDECAMARAS was now "President". In fact, Chávez had been kidnapped by masked armed men and taken to a secret location, a fact that CNN and FOX News regarded as "preposterous" but was later proven correct by eyewitnesses and Chávez himself. Just like with Venezuela's first democratically elected president, Rómulo Gallegos, the US plan was to overthrow a left leaning elected president and institute a dictatorship as it happened in Venezuela in 1948 (a deed that was approved by Truman himself).

Immediately following this announcement by the military on that morning massive protests began to occur across Venezuela. The historically conservative Metropolitan Police, under the orders of the military commanders who took over the country were told to "shoot to kill" any protestor. The police's response to the protests was brutal but it didn't stop more and more working class people from joining the protests with sheer defiance in the face of utmost brutality. Likewise in most Latin American nations, people protested the brutality of the fledgling Carmona regime.

The United States on the other hand, approved of the coup and was the first country in the world to recognize the Carmona government. Mouthpieces of the Bush administration quickly blamed the violence in Venezuela on "a few radical pro-Chavez supporters", whereas in fact it was the military and the police controlled by Carmona who were the ones killing people who protested the overthrow of the democracy. While briefly in power, Carmona decided to fully implement the pro-Washington dictatorial agenda: he dissolved the National Assembly, declared the current constitution void, repealed 49 laws that had been made by Chavez to put funds into the economy and give benefits to the poor, fired all Supreme Court judges as well as those in the National Electoral Courts, and declared martial law. Now, facing the reality of life, even some of the rich who had supported the US-sanctioned coup, began to feel fear since Carmona was now in full capacity to expropriate anything he wanted—from anyone.

48 hours later, on April 15th, the working poor who had staged massive protests had a new ally: sectors of the military who wanted the democracy to return. These lower ranking officers rolled their tanks and infantry into Caracas and re-took the seat of government. Chávez's vice president, Diosdado Cabello then took office since no one still knew were Chávez was. Dictator Carmona packed his bags as quickly as he could but not quickly enough: he was placed under house arrest. In the coming weeks he remained under house arrest until a trial was to be scheduled. As time passed throughout the day of April 15th it was known that Chávez's captors fled the country and that he was en-route from the Orchila Island to Caracas. Amid cheering crowds and the officers that rose up against Carmona, Chávez was once again was president of Venezuela. The US state department and Colin Powell quickly condemned the coup just 24 hours after having given praise to Carmona for overthrowing Chávez.

The hypocrisy on behalf of the US government was so great that articles in the New York Times, Washington Post, and other mainstream American news sources quoted the contradictions of US State Department officials. As days passed and Carmona remained under house arrest one day, he went out of the house with very possible complicity on behalf of some corrupt sectors of the Venezuelan police and fled to the Colombian embassy in Caracas, which gave him safe passage to Colombia; once there, Carmona received a warm welcome from the right wing government of Alvaro Uribe who welcomed him as a friend and gave him political asylum. It is to be noted that Chávez himself didn't go to great lengths to keep Carmona as a prisoner since it would elevate Carmona to the height of a martyr for his fanatical right wing followers and would feed more fire to the Bush regime's accusations against Chávez. This once and for all dispels the farce that there may be "political prisoners" in Venezuela. Bush quickly talked about "lessons to be learned by Chávez". Indeed, the ones learning the lessons of history would be the United States and Bush himself, since an overwhelming amount of concrete and factual evidence has surfaced on the US complicity in the coup against Chávez and made a fool out of not only Bush but also the Venezuelan opposition.

The New York Times reported that US assistant secretary for the Western hemisphere, Otto Reich, was in contact with Carmona just hours after Carmona took over on April 12th. Pentagon officials later admitted that Rogelio Pardo-Maurer, the US Defense Department official responsible for Latin America, had discussed possibilities for a coup attempt with high ranking members of Venezuela's military and the elite in Washington DC just weeks before the coup occurred. The IRI (the International Republican Institute) also gave financial assistance and bribes to high-ranking military officers to help overthrow Chávez.

The Israeli Mossad is also said to have taken part in the plot against the Social Democracy, but they were able to cover their tracks better than their American counterparts; evidence still exists however, of a Mossad spy in Venezuelan soil during the coup, who quickly fled once Chávez returned to power. The government of ex-Spanish conservative President Aznar is also said to have taken part in the coup against Chávez, and in 2004, the current President of Spain, Zapatero, publicly apologized to Chávez on behalf of all Spain for the despicable involvement of Aznar in the coup. Zapatero was so outraged by the evidence he received from Spain's own intelligence records of the previous government and its involvement in the coup, that he went on a firing spree, firing everyone in his own government who had collaborated in the coup against Chávez. One has to remember also that Aznar was one of the most ardent supporters of Bush's invasion of Iraq as well. Hated by 92% of Spaniards, Aznar tries to stay as far away from Spain as he can by being in the US most of his time.

White House advisor Elliott Abrams, who was one of the intellectual architects of the overthrow of Allende in Chile in 1973, was another key player in planning the coup against Chávez in 2002. The Washington Post reported in April of 2002 that the US embassy in Venezuela had violated its diplomatic function and instead had become a tool in the overthrow of Chávez by giving advice and monetary support to anyone willing to topple Chávez's government, whether it be people in the Venezuelan media, the military, businessmen, or politicians. Indeed an anonymous Defense Department official bluntly put it "we were sending signals that we don't like this guy (Chávez)".

Prior to the coup, since February of 2002, protests by PDVSA, the government controlled oil company had sparked a lot of problems for Chávez. The protests began because the DISIP and the Venezuelan police found that the head of PDVSA was involved in fraud and corruption along with a whole array of other people inside the company. Chávez decided to fire them all and put them on trial for theft of public funds; he proceeded to put into the chairmanship of the company people with a background suited for the job. The result was that friends and family members of these corrupt ex-CEO's decided to go on a smear campaign against Chávez. The US embassy provided these individuals with funds to propagate their case against Chávez in private TV channels like Venevision (who is owned by a right wing businessman).

The Venezuelan economy suffered greatly due to the strike that followed which was financed by the US government and the wealthy class. Some poor workers were persuaded to join the protests by giving them money, but most of the poor remained strongly in favor of Chávez. As usual, Chávez allowed the opposition to protest and respected their right to peacefully assemble. So before the coup of April, the hopes of the opposition and the US government had been to destabilize Venezuela enough through protests and sabotage so that the coup would be done more successfully. Neither the protests in PDVSA nor the coup was able to topple the Social Democracy and as of now, 2005, 68% of the Venezuelan population is happy with Chávez's presidency. 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25

Continued Sabotage and Terrorism

Since the MVR Party under Chávez rose to power, the rich oligarchy has sought different routes of getting rid of him. First they proposed a vote to revoke the President from his office in 2000. They argued that Chávez was a dictator and the people should vote on whether he should be allowed to continue to govern or not. The National Assembly approved the proposal and so did Chávez. By an overwhelming majority, the vote was marked in favor of Chávez and once again, the poor marched on the streets in solidarity with the government. Then of course, came the US intervention in the coup of 2002 and the oligarchy and US funded PDVSA strikes aimed at paralyzing the economy (as stated earlier, neither of these worked).

In 2003 the US and the rich Venezuelan oligarchy alongside the private media (owned by the oligarchy as well) made a gigantic campaign of tarnishing Chávez's images in any ways possible. The oligarchy went to the slums of Caracas and gave poor people handouts so that they would go out and protest against Chávez. Attacking the President's marriage and divorce and completely irrelevant aspects of his personal life such as the fact that he "he came from a poor background" and hence he had to be "ignorant like all poor people"; none of these irrelevant personal attacks were able to persuade public opinion against Chávez and the masses of poor people stood firmly behind the President.

However, much productivity began to fall due to economic sabotage. Money was now beginning to be channeled by the oligarchy in bribing transport companies in Venezuela so that truckers would not deliver their goods. Chávez's response was simple: foreign workers would be hired to fulfill the country's transportation needs until the sabotage ceased. Few months later, the opposition realized that once again, their futile attempts to destabilize the government had resulted in only one thing: their own pockets getting thinner and their energy being wasted; Venezuela's economy itself was hurt from these acts of sabotage by the opposition. Soon after however, the situation was normalized again and the economy went right back on track.

In 2004 the opposition went back to what it had done 2000: another revocatory referendum aimed at ousting the President. Through huge amounts of dollars, they bribed people to protest and say they wanted another vote on whether to revoke the President from power or not. Chávez as usual, said he accepted their proposal. The opposition once again went to the slums of Caracas, Maracaibo, and other major cities, but this time their tactic was different: they gave the poor handouts of sugar and other basic goods so that they would simply not vote! The poor took the handouts and did what they wanted to do. This was seen in the result of the referendum: once again the poor of Venezuela massively voted in favor of Chávez and the President stayed in power. For this vote, former US President Jimmy Carter and other foreign observers along with European agencies were in Venezuela to make sure the voting was done without any problems and no types of fraud occurred.

After the vote declared Chávez the winner once again, the opposition complained that there had been discrepancies in the voting process. The European agencies that monitored the voting as well as Jimmy Carter said that the voting process had gone smoothly and that all the votes had been hand-counted (as opposed to the US were lately LOTS of discrepancies do occur in national elections). In essence, after it was known to the world that democracy was alive and well in Venezuela and that the claims of the opposition that the government was run by "Communists" was proven to be a lie, the oligarchs became the laughing stock of most of South America. Indeed, due to its exposed lies, the opposition resorts now to more dirty and criminal tactics.

Chávez and the National Assembly passed a law in 2004, which stated that news sources should present evidence to anything they presented in the news. This was to insure that the debauchery, the blackmail, and the lies of the oligarchy-owned media stopped. Chávez said that disagreeing was perfectly fine but lying in the media to the Venezuelan people was not. Immediately the US State Department called Chávez a "force that threatens democracy". Last time I checked, wanting the media to be objective and fact-based as opposed to spreading rumors and lies, was something that most rational people want and is completely in line with core democratic values.

Ironically, President Vicente Fox of México passed a similar law that very same year, but since México bases almost all of its trade with the US, the Bush administration never even mentioned a word about Fox's proposed law. In fact, México's law not only targets false information in the media but also goes a step further than what Venezuela's law does: it also censures programs in prime time. As said before not a single word in protest was uttered by the US government against Fox's government.

Attempts to kill Chávez continue to this day. In September of 2003 Chávez did not attend the United Nations to give a speech because the Venezuelan police had intercepted phone calls in which a plot to kill Chávez in US soil was the topic of conversation. The DISIP and other Venezuelan police forces considered the threat real and a report was written on it, accusing the CIA of having hired for large sums of money, assassins in organized crime to do the dirty deed. Lieutenant Colonel Miguel Angel Morales was recently detained for his complicity with the AUC (Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia) and other right wing Colombian paramilitaries in a plan to assassinate Chávez.

The plan was developed in a house at the Caracas Country Club (an exclusive place in Caracas were the rich and the right wing elite of Venezuela meet) the 23rd of April of 2004 to discuss with a CIA operative and members of the AUC possible plans to assassinate the president. Little did Morales know that an agent of the Venezuelan police was also present in the meeting as an undercover agent and was able to tape entire conversations that Morales had with his partners-in-crime. Now Morales awaits his well-deserved trial. Another terrorist that is being tried is Enrique Mendoza, who was an ex-governor in Venezuela; he stands accused in the face of evidence and eyewitness accounts of an intricate and imaginative plan to assassinate Chávez and was personally responsible for carrying out orders given by Dictator Carmona during the coup of April 11th, 2002; evidence also links Mendoza to a wide array of corruption charges.

It is to be noted also, that Mendoza met with Republican Congressmen in Washington prior to the coup. As an aside, in 2004 during the US ousting of Haitian President Bertrand Aristide, Venezuelan intelligence obtained hours of phone conversations of CIA operatives discussing the dissolution of the Aristide government. So state-sponsored terrorism has been done by the Bush regime not only in Venezuela but also in Haiti as well. Since the coup of 2002, over 400 members of the right-wing Metropolitan Police of Venezuela have been tried and convicted for their ties to internal criminal activities, including kidnappings, drug trafficking and extortions in order to obtain funding for terrorist and sabotage activities against Chávez.

On November 18, 2004, Venezuelan State prosecutor Danilo Anderson who was investigating more than 200 people (many of them CIA agents) implicated in crimes against the state and the Venezuelan people was murdered with a car bomb. Evidence states that the terrorists planned their crime from Miami. Amongst the assassins was José Guevara, ex-police officer, an explosives expert, and a good old friend of Enrique Mendoza (who is being tried as mentioned earlier). Evidence now links Héctor Pesquera, the head of the FBI office in Miami, Florida as the intellectual author of the crime. After Anderson's murder, José Guevara fled to the US and received full government protection and obtained a "political asylum" visa from his partner in crime, Pesquera, the head of the FBI office in Miami. Likewise, the other murderer involved was Johan Peña, who was the criminal responsible for obtaining and placing the C4 plastic explosives from Colombian right wing paramilitaries, under Anderson's car. He then proceeded to detonate the vehicle with a remote controlled device. As is the case with Guevara, Peña also received political asylum in the US through the FBI's Miami office. Note that, Pesquera, is no longer head of the FBI in Miami and was "retired" by the Bush regime when mounting evidence pointed at him for the murder of Anderson.

Both of these murderers however, still are free, in US soil. Other political assassinations done in recent years against Venezuelan government officials had been planned by Pesquera and his FBI staff; amongst a large and compelling list of political assassins that received Pesquera's help are José Basulto and Horacio Garcia, who committed several assassinations in Venezuelan soil and received asylum in the US. The result from these strings of terrorist acts was that Chávez proposed an anti-terrorism bill to put place more government funds for the Venezuelan intelligence agencies to prevent future assassinations financed by the United States and other foreign governments. The law would also give rewards to people who inform the government of active terrorist cells in Venezuela.

The bill passed almost unanimously in the National Assembly, showing that almost all Venezuelans are sick and tired of the US government's meddling hands in their internal affairs and every-day life. Since then, the string of assassinations has stopped and dozens of CIA-sponsored terrorist cells have been disarmed and brought to justice. Colombian terrorists, who are given moral support by Alvaro Uribe, Colombia's conservative president have also been targeted and put on trial for acts of sabotage. The bill also proposed to South American countries to work closely together to thwart US interventionism and terrorism. The result was quicker than expected: on May 12th of 2004, a member of the opposition, Emelcar Delgado an army lieutenant who had been working with CIA officials in stealing explosives from military bases and giving them to terrorist cells sought political asylum at Uruguay's embassy in Caracas after a court ordered a warrant for his arrest; Uruguay's government however, handed him back to Venezuelan authorities, who promptly incarcerated him.

Eva Golinger, a Venezuelan-American lawyer obtained through the Freedom of Information Act a vast array of documents which completely and utterly prove the US involvement between Republican American Congressmen and the military officers who did the coup against Chávez in 2002. She has revealed how the US administration to this day continues to interfere in the affairs of Venezuela and how the taxpayers of average Americans are used in dirty deeds against Venezuela's government. Also, her documentation reveals that the NED (National Endowment for Democracy) as well as the USAID (US International Agency for Development) are other sponsors of terrorism against the Venezuelan people. It's worth mentioning that these two organizations were key in the overthrow of Allende in Chile in 1973, so they have a long history of crimes against South America. It is highly recommended for the reader to him or herself take a look at source number 21 in this work. In January 2005, Venezuelan Vice President, Vicente Rangel stated that he received yet another stack of evidence from intercepted phone calls and emails as well as from spies that the US has a long term plan to support illegal activities and terrorism against Venezuela until its interests in the region are re-established as it was during CAP's presidency. We can therefore expect more terrorism on behalf of the current President of the United States and other enemies of freedom.1, 2, 7, 8, 11, 13, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 25

A Legacy to Defend

Chávez's Bolivarian Revolution has created a window to the future for the working poor of Venezuela. It is only by caring about your citizens and giving them a basic standard of living that you can begin to push a country forward towards modernization and scientific progress. For once, Venezuela has a leader that has allowed the masses to aspire to more than just being mules or pack animals. For once, Venezuela has someone that has increased the GDP of the country by 17 % yet not left the people forgotten in poverty and illiteracy. Health care and the Barrio Adentro plan have provided millions with basic medical aid, at no cost whatsoever to the poor. 7, 10, 11 It truly is no wonder that the United States can no longer, distribute a few dollars around and expect the Venezuelan government to crumble. Why? Because the poor, the majority, are happy with the changes that are happening; no longer shall they be deceived with handouts of sugar and corn meal since they can now aspire to a better education, to free health care, a basic minimum wage, and safety standards in the workplace that are enforced by law. Even if Chávez was to be killed by an assassin sent by the CIA or the Gusanos (maggots—term used for those Venezuelans who were in favor of the US intervention in April of 2002) a legacy would live on in the future: people's expectations wouldn't be as low as before and they would strive for more and expect more. Conformity for deficiency is no longer existent in Venezuela.

In 2004 Venezuela signed 17 cooperation accords with China in science and energy technology; China's exporting technologies to Venezuela in return for oil will guarantee Venezuela's road towards becoming a 1st world country and not depending on the technology of foreign companies. Indeed, like Brazil, Venezuela has purchased satellite technology from China and is in the process of designing its own communications satellite. Venezuela also purchased China's railroad technology and designs to begin a project for connecting all of Venezuela with a railroad system, which would save millions of dollars in transportation. France has multiplied by a factor of 12 its investments in Venezuela and trade with Germany has dramatically increased as well. Venezuela has drastically reduced trade with the Bush administration due to its constant interference in Venezuela's sovereignty and also because the types of industries that American companies set up in Venezuela are sweat shop types—namely, ones that really help little the people yet give huge profits to the corporation. China on the other hand invests technology in Venezuela, thus giving and receiving in return.

Russia has also built industries in Venezuela, training local workers and entrepreneurs so that they themselves have the technological know-how, as opposed to simply making a profit and having a bunch of drones who do a single task and don't understand the sum of the parts of the process of manufacturing and producing. Venezuela has also begun to manufacture its own weapons and has purchased high-tech weaponry from China and Russia in the face of the dangers posed by the Colombian and the US governments to Venezuela's national sovereignty. In response, the Bush regime stated that it was "concerned" about Venezuela's arms purchases.

When one translates what they mean into common language it means that they are concerned because Venezuela no longer purchases its weapons from the US companies that helped Bush finance his political campaign. Republican hypocrisy seems to be endless these days, since the US has literally given Colombia brand new combat helicopters as well as a vast array of modern personnel carriers. Then again, Bush doesn't complain about arming Venezuela's opponents. Recently, Chávez and President Lula of Brazil and President Kirchner of Argentina, all have signed a treaty of integration for the three countries. Chávez was a pioneer in the idea that South America should stand united before the world in order to be able to negotiate things more favorably for their own people and to stand up to foreign interventionism.

On January 27th, 2005, Venezuela's acting ambassador to Paraguay, Elmer Nino, publicly stated that Venezuela's government has physical proof that the Bush regime has plans for a possible invasion of Venezuela. Reasons for such an invasion are of course, financial, just like the Iraq War was. Venezuela's case would be all the more apparent however: the US is having less trade with Venezuela and juicy deals are now impossible to achieve since the days of foreign exploitation of the local populace are long gone. The US has its eyes set on the vast oil, gas, and gold reserves of Venezuela. Should the Bush regime try to commit an act such as that, which violates international law, just like the invasion of Iraq, it is to be noted that the Venezuelan people are united in their struggle to ending foreign dominance and exploitation and shall be willing to fight to the bitter end.

In Venezuela's vast jungles, an endless resistance to the occupation would cripple the neo con dream of having a subservient oil-milking cow near the US. It is important to take into account that while Bill Clinton was still in power in the US in '98 when Chávez won the elections, not a single time did the US interfere in Venezuela's sovereignty and the Presidents of both countries had normal dialogue; indeed all the detailed aggressions against Venezuela on behalf of the US have occurred ever since the Bush Junior regime came into existence. Today, February 20th, 2005, Chávez gave the order to his government that if he was to be assassinated by US funded assassins, all oil shipments to the US are to be cut and the country to be defended from the aggressors.

Last week Cuban intelligence forewarned Chávez that the US government had recruited assassins in neighboring Colombia to commit the crime. Venezuelan intelligence later confirmed the reports to be valid with substantial evidence to back up their claim. An invasion of Venezuela may or may not occur in the coming months, but we are sure to encounter more dirty deeds against our elected government from our northern "brothers" as long as the Republicans control the Supreme Court, have a majority in Congress and have the presidency in the US. Until Americans themselves start protesting the international terrorism that the Bush regime conducts abroad, few things will change, other than the fact that the US will have a lot of people who will detest them for very concrete reasons. Indeed, "regime change" in America today is not only necessary for the well being of the American people, but for the sake of global peace as well. 2, 7, 8, 11, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22

References

(1) Wickipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org

(2) BitBiblioteca, http://www.analitica.com/bitblioteca/hchavez/

(3) Case, Fair, Principles of Macroeconomics, 5th edition, New Jersey, 1999

(4) Gott, Richard, A Silent Majority Finds Its Voice, New Statesman, June 29, 2002

(5) Busca Biografías, http://buscabiografias.com/cgi-bin/verbio.cgi?id=4273

(6) The Code, Replacing White Supremacy with Justice, http://www.thecode.net

(7) Asamblea Popular Venezolana, http://www.aporrea.org/

(8) Gobierno en Línea, http://www.gobiernoenlinea.gob.ve

(9) Yahoo News (Reuters), http://mx.news.yahoo.com/041216/2/1bnb2.html

(10)El Tiempo, (AFP), http://eltiempo.terra.com.co/economia/2005...OR-1979773.html (http://eltiempo.terra.com.co/economia/2005-02-17/ARTICULO-WEB-_NOTA_INTERIOR-1979773.html)

(11)Trinicenter, http://www.trinicenter.com/

(12) Center for Cooperative Research, Project: History of US Interventions, http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timelin...eline=venezuela (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=venezuela)

(13) BBC, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1929498.stm

(14) Film: The Revolution Will not Be Televised, Irish amateur filmmakers who happened to be in Venezuela during the coup, Radio Telifis Eireann

(15) The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/

(16) The Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/

(17) Russian News Site Iraq-War.Ru, http://www.iraq-war.ru/tiki-index.php

(18) WSWS, http://www.wsws.org/index.shtml

(19) Xinhuanet, http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/

(20) Yahoo News, AP, http://espanol.news.yahoo.com/050220/1/y2ii.html

(21) Infoia, http://www.venezuelafoia.info/,

(22) Eva Golinger, http://www.selvesandothers.org/view2270.html

(23) Agence France Presse (AFP), http://www.afp.com/english/home/

(24) La Fuga de Carmona y su Complicidad en el Golpe, http://www.angelfire.com/nb/17m/golpe11/fugacarmona.html

(25) Cofavic, http://www.cofavic.org.ve/casos.htm

Zacarias

8th June 2006, 07:08

oops double post

Poum_1936

20th June 2006, 14:43

I have spoke with the "President of outhern affairs" (sorry if this term is not korrekt, i am from austria and dont speak english very good) from Venezuela. He is a very cool man smile.gif He tell us much about the situation in Venezuela und the progress of the revolution. When you are interesstet i maybe will tell more about this discussion.

mrg
KdK

Hello Comrade!

Where you able to attend the May 12th rally! I hear there were "Nicolas Maduro, the President of the National Assembly, Juan Barreto, the mayor of Caracas, as well as the Minister of Planning, Jorge Giordani and Eva Gollinger, the author of The Chavez Code. Ruben Linares, one of the national co-ordinators of the UNT, was also present, as was the Cuban ambassador and a group of 20 Cubans from the embassy and the Instituto Cubano de Amistad de los Pueblos.

A number of high-ranking officials of the Austrian Trade Union Federation (ÖGB) were also present. The meeting was chaired by a young shop steward and member of HOV, Axel Magnus.

Apart from Chavez, there were only two speakers: Aleida Guevara, the daughter of Che Guevara, and Alan Woods, founder of the international Hands Off Venezuela campaign, who sat on either side of the President."

http://www.marxist.com/vienna-chavez-mass-...y-hov130506.htm (http://www.marxist.com/vienna-chavez-mass-rally-hov130506.htm)

If you were able to attend, perhapes you could tell us more, comrade?

leninist1917

30th June 2006, 15:38

This is an interesting article on the CWI website. I think it shows the need for the Venezuelan workinbg class and peasants to be vigilant, not to put too much faith in Chavez and his government and the need for an independent socialist party of the masses to be built to put a socialist transformation of society on the agenda.

Vice president: "Employers have nothing to fear"
The Venezuelan vice president, Vincente Rangel, is heading the governments’ intentions to redefine its policies and attitude to the private sector.

Karl Debbaut, cwi, Caracas, Venezuela, Tuesday 27 June 2006
Or to be more precise it has become the Vice-president’s task to shout it from the roof tops that the Venezuelan employers and the representatives of capitalism who are willing to tolerate the Chavez regime have nothing whatsoever to fear from the government.
Meeting with employers from Oriente and Guayana the vice president made it clear the government wanted to enter a new stage in its relationship with the employers and the private sector. Rangel called on the bosses to “take up institutional political positions”. He added that “they do not have the right to engage in the bastard forms of politics like the coup or the lock-out” and finished with the solemn promise that the “government will respect private property”.
These comments by the Vice-president are another reminder of the limits of the Chavez government and its “socialism in the 21st century” which in its most radical form is a stageist approach to building socialism. In its more common form it represents an attempt to built Venezuelan capitalism with a ‘human face’ and use a larger part of Venezuela’s wealth to build the country, it’s infrastructure and carve out a sphere of influence for Venezuela in Latin America.
The TV shows here promote the Bolivarian government and its achievements. It has to be said that the Chavez government has indeed developed many social programs and invested millions in health care and education. Nevertheless the advertisment to arouse the passion of ordinary Venezuelans for the nationalised oil company PDVSA is an example of the limits of this process. The advert praises the virtues of the mixed companies (part private and part state) and its most clinching argument is that whilst commercial disputes under the old regime would have been brought before an American court of law then thanks to the Bolivarian government now these will have to be brought to a Venezuelan court of law.
Although there is of course merit in advancing the sovereignty of Venezuela and its control over its resources but it is hardly the kind of stuff that sets the mind racing with ideas about how to create a new socialist society.
The growing tiredness with the slowness of the process and the growing understanding of the limits of the government are taking hold in the most pro-Chavez areas of Caracas. Street interviews in the pro-opposition paper El Nacional (25 June 2006) gave an interesting picture of the feelings among many Venezuelans in the run-up to the national elections. In La Vega, an area of Caracas described by the inhabitants as pro-Chavez territory, people talk of their disillusionment with the government. Guadalupe Jaramillo, a member of the UBE (Unidades de Batalla Electoral – the pro Chavez mobilisation machine) sums up the feelings of many when she declared “We are disillusioned, they do not take us into account. We are unemployed and they do not help us. We work from the morning till the evening for the election campaign, but when they win they forget about us, it is like it was under the old political system. But I am ready to work and do whatever it takes to assure a victory of President Chávez”
While there many like Guadalupe who will fight to get Chávez re-elected for fear of what he might be replaced with, the regime cannot take their support for granted. The only way the reforms implemented by the Chávez regime can be protected and widened is by the building of an independent movement of the working class, young people and poor peasantry committed to the overthrow of capitalism and the building of a democratic socialist Venezuela.

Louis Pio

4th July 2006, 17:23

Louis Pio

7th July 2006, 18:24

And the second part
The Venezuelan Revolution and the struggle for socialism: Balance sheet, perspectives and tasks - Part Two: the Venezuelan economy (http://www.marxist.com/venezuelan-perspectives-economy060706.htm)

LeninReborn

28th July 2006, 16:42

Chavez is a good man. He has my respect and loyalty. It's unfortunate the American government keeps trying to kill him..

guerrillaradio

7th August 2006, 02:56

Just to throw some fat in the fire, this is not a perfect article, but it's more impartial than most and probably worth a critical reading:

Venezuela, Socialism to the Highest Bidder (http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=3378)

Louis Pio

10th August 2006, 23:31

Hmm as I said to the author I don't think his article is of much use. In my oppinion it's greatest flaw is that it limits itself to look at what goes on within the boundaries of mere parliamentary democracy instead of looking at the classforces at work on both sides, and don't put any importance into the cases of workers control. In the end it actually refuses that the situation in Venezuela is a revolutionary one and from that standpoint you will be unable to understand what goes on.
I think a position likes that emerges from a lack of trust in the workers classinstincts.

TedGrant

20th August 2006, 14:26

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 12:39 PM
This is an interesting article on the CWI website. I think it shows the need for the Venezuelan workinbg class and peasants to be vigilant, not to put too much faith in Chavez and his government and the need for an independent socialist party of the masses to be built to put a socialist transformation of society on the agenda.

While I do agree with a lot of the sentiments in the CWI article I do sense a bit of 'mischief ' making on their part.
The CWI have been desperate to get in on the action in Venezuela , especially now that their arch enemies in the CMI have had so much success. Now they have a tiny foothold they have started to try and distance the movement from Chavez who they are building up to be some kind of Allende type character. This maybe true but needs to be proved by events.All the CWI are doing is promoting their 'new workers party' solution to the Venezuela Revolution where in my view the workers and peasants movement is clearly to the left of what you have in the advanced countries in Europe.
The ideas of Marxism are being fought for in the movement and this can be clearly seen in the articles quoted by Teis above, and through the activities of the CMR.

I believe the HOV/IDOM do not hold any illusions in Chavez but at the same timehave consistently argued for an independent working class solution without ignoring the role Chavez has played.

Jamal

21st August 2006, 02:32

Well, after seeing "The Revolution Will Not Be Telivised" and reading about the situation in venezuela, I think that the most important thing that Chavez must do is find a way to get the CIA out of his way because they are standing in the way of fast progress in venzuella. Anyway, what Chavez did and withstood, in the past years, is just honorable and tough of him and for that he takes full credit!

OneBrickOneVoice

5th September 2006, 01:27

Just one question. Why the hell does Chavez so vividly allign himself with Iran and it's pyschoislamofascist dictator?

Jamal

5th September 2006, 16:49

the world today is witnessing an alliance between the left and the islamic fundimentalists to face imperialism. It is better for the left this way, uniting itself for the first time with the opressed fundimentalists to rid itself from the torture of imperialism.

Louis Pio

6th September 2006, 12:19

Venezuelan presidential elections: vote for Chavez, carry the revolution out to the end - Statement of the International Marxist Tendency (http://www.marxist.com/venezuelan-presidential-elections-revolution050906.htm)

Venezuelan presidential elections: vote for Chavez, carry the revolution out to the end
By the International Marxist Tendency
Tuesday, 05 September 2006
Statement of the International Marxist Tendency
The December presidential elections are an important turning point in the development of the Venezuelan Revolution. They reflect the struggle between the Venezuelan workers and peasants and the oligarchy and imperialism. Our attitude towards these elections is therefore a key question.

Marxism has nothing in common with anarchism. We have never denied the importance of the electoral struggle as part of the class struggle. For the masses the question is very clear: a vote for Chavez is a vote for the revolution. On the other hand, the oligarchy and imperialism are doing everything in their power to bring about the defeat of Chavez. At bottom this is a class question and we must take our place side by side with the revolutionary workers and peasants fighting against imperialism and the oligarchy.

The counterrevolutionary forces have already started a campaign to discredit the elections. They will use all the means at their disposal to undermine them: bribery, corruption, slander and lies and all kinds of sabotage. They will have at their disposal considerable resources: the wealth of the oligarchy, the technology of the CIA, the backing of the US embassy, the yellow press and the rest of the prostituted media.

On the other side we have the revolutionary spirit, courage and dedication of millions of Venezuelan workers, peasants and urban poor, the revolutionary youth, the revolutionary sections of the army and the progressive artists and intelligentsia - in short, all the live forces of Venezuelan society, backed by the exploited masses of Latin America and the working class of the entire world.

The workers and peasants are fighting to transform society. Great advances have been made, but the final goal has not been reached. The power of the oligarchy has not yet been broken. As long as this is the case, the revolution cannot be irreversible and will be constantly under threat.

Elections and the class struggle
The electoral struggle is part of the class struggle. Although the decisive issues are always settled in the last analysis outside parliament - in the factories, on the streets, on the land and in the barracks - the electoral struggle is a means whereby the revolutionary forces can be mobilised and measure their strength against the counterrevolution.

The electoral struggle played a most important role in mobilizing the Venezuelan workers and peasants after the massacre of the Caracazo. Every victory on the electoral front (including the recall referendum of August 2004) has objectively strengthened the revolutionary tendency and weakened the counterrevolutionary tendency. It has helped to defeat and demoralize the forces of reaction and to create the most favourable conditions for carrying out the socialist revolution.

In the Russian Revolution of 1917, the existence of the soviets - revolutionary organs of workers' power - meant that the parliamentary element played a secondary role. When the Constituent Assembly was finally convened (after the working class had taken power through the soviets) it had already exhausted any progressive historical potential it might have had and was soon dispersed by the soviets led by the Bolsheviks.

However, it was by no means excluded that the Russian Revolution could pass through a phase of parliamentarism, as did the Great French Revolution of 1789-93. The Venezuelan Revolution has followed a path that is more similar to that of the French Revolution than that of the Russian Revolution. The elements of workers' power exist - in the occupied factories and the movement towards workers' control - but so far they exist only in an embryonic state. This means that the electoral front will continue to occupy a central position.

The revolutionary Marxists wholeheartedly support the re-election of Chavez, but at the same time we are fighting to carry the revolution out to the end. A decisive victory in the December elections must be followed by decisive measures to disarm the counterrevolution and expropriate the oligarchy. Only in this way can the revolution be made irreversible.

The electoral struggle, although important, cannot resolve the central question of power. It can create favourable conditions to carry out the revolution. But in the final analysis, the struggle for power will not be resolved by speeches and resolutions in parliament. The oligarchy will never surrender its power and privileges without a ferocious struggle. To shut one's eyes to this fact would be the greatest irresponsibility and a crime against the revolution.

The bourgeoisie and "legality"
We are told that we must uphold the rule of law. But what is the attitude of the oligarchy to legality? The landlords and capitalists speak constantly about "democracy" but in reality they only support "democracy" as long as it represents their class interests. But when elections return a government that does not represent the interests of the rich and powerful, when it tries to uphold the interests of the poor and exploited, then the oligarchy turns against democracy and resorts to extraparliamentary activity - sabotage, assassinations, and coup d'etats.

In 2002 these "democrats" organised a coup against the democratically elected government. Only the revolutionary movement of the masses saved the revolution. A few months later they organised the bosses' lockout and sabotage of the oil company PDVSA, which brought the economy to its knees. Again, only the working class saved the situation by threatening to occupy the factories and running the oil industry under workers' control.

The recall referendum was yet another attempt to destabilise the country and use the Bolivarian Constitution to overthrow the government. Of course, the first thing they would have done if they had succeeded would have been to abolish the right of recall along with the rest of the Bolivarian Constitution. Once again, it was the unerring revolutionary instinct of the masses that saved the situation.

Finally, in December 2005, the opposition boycotted the Legislative Elections, realising that they would have obtained a ridiculous result. By this action, they effectively declared war on democracy. They threw down a gauntlet to the people of Venezuela. They said: no matter how you vote, no matter who is elected, we intend to hold onto our power and privileges and we will fight to the death to defend them.

Thus, at every decisive stage of the revolution, the oligarchy has shown its complete contempt for all democratic, parliamentary and legal norms. They have consistently resorted to extraparliamentary methods to overthrow the government elected by the people. This is a fact that cannot be denied. We must draw the necessary conclusions. In order to advance the revolution must defend itself against the illegal and extraparliamentary agitation and aggression of the counterrevolutionary oligarchy. There is only one way to do this: the oligarchy must be defeated, disarmed and expropriated. That is to say, the struggle to win the Second Battle of Santa Ines must be linked clearly and firmly to the struggle for socialism.

The Bolivarian Revolution has taken giant strides forward, but it has yet to solve the fundamental problems. The main challenges facing the revolution are:

the question of the economy,
the question of the state,
the lack of an organised expression of the revolutionary movement,
the arming of the people.
The economy
After a decisive victory in the Presidential elections the Bolivarian Movement will enjoy a commanding position in the National Assembly and every other level of government. There will therefore be no excuse for not taking decisive measures against the oligarchy, which still owns and controls key points in the national economy. Unless this is rectified, there can be no talk of socialism or revolution and the Bolivarian Republic will always be in danger. The oligarchy will always use its control of banking and finance (80% in the hands of Spanish multinationals), food distribution (in the hands of two monopoly groups), telecommunications (in the hands of three or four multinational groups), the media (controlled by four powerful monopolies), private manufacturing, etc, to sabotage the economy. Despite initial measures of land reform the overwhelming majority of fertile land remains in the hands of a handful of landowners.

The National Assembly must introduce an enabling act to expropriate the land, the banks and finance houses and all major industries under workers' control and management. This is the prior condition for the introduction of a democratic socialist plan of production. All the wealth of Venezuela, in the first place its vast unused human resources, can be mobilized and put to work to build the houses, schools and hospitals that are needed. This is the only way to place the revolution on a firm basis and make it irreversible. All other proposals amount to mere reformist tinkering that will solve nothing and end in a crisis.

A real socialist planned economy has nothing in common with the bureaucratic totalitarian state that existed in Stalinist Russia. It is based on the democratic participation and control of the economy at all levels by the working people themselves, including the scientists, engineers, agronomists, planners, architects and economists. Freed from the dictatorship of private profit, the economy will expand at an unprecedented rate. Unemployment would disappear overnight and the basis would be laid for a general increase in living standards.

As the economy expands and the conditions of the masses improve, it will be possible to bring about a general reduction in working hours without prejudicing productivity. Under capitalism the introduction of new machinery and technology does not lead to a reduction of the working day, but on the contrary, to a continual expansion of the hours of work and a constant increase in the burden of labour. In a socialist planned economy, the generalised application of new technology will lead to a reduction in working hours, which is the prior condition for the participation of the masses in the running of industry and the state and in art, science and culture. This, and no other, is the real material basis upon which socialism of the 21st century will be built.

The state
After nine years of Bolivarian government, the state apparatus remains in a lamentable state. A genuine revolution cannot simply take over the existing state and use it for revolutionary purposes. The old state of the IV Republic was a state designed to defend the status quo and the interests of the exploiters, a capitalist state. It was based on corruption and violence against the people, a vast bureaucratic monster serving the interests of the rich and powerful.

That was the state the Bolivarian Revolution took over. What has changed? Some of the worst elements have been purged and there are some honest Bolivarian ministers and officials who are trying to carry out the wishes of the people. But in every ministry there are many people who wear a red shirt but who are enemies of the revolution and work against it. Corruption and abuse is widespread and the influence of counterrevolutionary elements is a constant threat to the revolution.

In order to succeed, the revolution cannot base itself on such a state, but must create a new state in its own image: a workers' state on the lines of the Paris Commune or the democratic workers' republic established by the Bolsheviks in Russia before it was destroyed by Stalin and the bureaucracy. Such a state would be under the democratic control of the workers, with salaries strictly limited to no more than the wage of a skilled worker.

All officials would be elected and subject to instant recall if they did not carry out the wishes of the people. Only in this way can the cancer of bureaucracy be extirpated from the body of the revolution and the conditions be established for the participation of the whole people in the administration of industry, society and the state, without which socialism would be just an empty word.

The need for an organised expression of the revolutionary movement
Without organisation the revolution cannot succeed. The masses hold tremendous power in their hands, but this power must be organised and directed to a central aim. Without this, it will remain a mere potential with no actual content. It will be dissipated in the air like steam, which becomes a power only when concentrated in a piston-box.

In Venezuela today, millions of working people are organised in tens of thousands of organisations, land committees, Bolivarian Circles, revolutionary assemblies, class struggle trade unions, water commissions, health care organisations, misiones, etc. But these are atomised and isolated. There is no national body in which they are represented and through which the experience of the masses in struggle can be shared and generalised. The Bolivarian political parties represented in parliament are widely regarded as purely electoral machines, unaccountable to the revolutionary people, and full of careerist and reformist elements.

The coming elections provide us with a great opportunity to perfect the revolutionary organisations of the masses. Electoral Battle Units for Socialism should be set up in every factory, barracks, school and neighbourhood, and linked at local, regional and national level through elected and recallable delegates. In such a National Revolutionary Assembly all the different tendencies and ideas that exist within the Bolivarian movement would be able to express themselves and put their proposals to the democratic decision of the organised revolutionary movement.

At every level it is necessary to promote the establishment of democratic revolutionary organisations that unite the workers, peasants, women, youth and revolutionary soldiers. These revolutionary mass organisations (the equivalent of the soviets in revolutionary Russia) will begin by organising the revolutionary struggle, but will inevitably end by taking power into their own hands. They are the embryo of the new society that is being formed within the womb of the old.

The establishment of such organisations is a key question for the revolution, and is essential for its success. They must be linked up on a local, regional and finally, national level. This is the most urgent task facing us.

Above all, it is necessary to press for the establishment of genuine proletarian organisations. The UNT must be united and strengthened as the basic organisation of the class and the cutting edge of the revolution. Too much time has been already wasted in internal squabbling. The UNT must start to act as a genuinely revolutionary union, not a talking-shop. Taking up the proposal of President Chavez, it must immediately draw up a plan of every abandoned or badly run enterprise and take it over under workers' control.

In addition to the UNT, there is the movement of occupied factories (Freteco). This is playing a key role in uniting and mobilizing the workers in the occupied factories. This is the cutting edge of the revolutionary movement and should be developed and extended to every region of the country.

Arm the people!
The imperialists are watching developments in Venezuela closely. They understand that a victory for Chavez in the Presidential elections poses a threat to them, not just in Venezuela but also in all Latin America.

Washington will try by every means to secure the overthrow of President Chavez, including assassination. It is true that at the moment they are trapped in a quagmire in Iraq and that this makes a direct military intervention by the USA extremely difficult. But it is not excluded that, in desperation, they might stage some kind of intervention, probably using the services of mercenaries or fascists from Colombia. The threat is very real and we must be prepared.

This is particularly the case in the countryside, where the land owners are already setting up paramilitary groups to defend their properties against agrarian reform. More than a hundred peasant activists have been killed already in disputes over land reform. This one-sided civil war in the countryside must be combated with the setting up of armed democratic self-defence committees under the control of the peasant organisations.

A people that is not prepared to defend itself with arms in hand deserves to be slaves. President Chavez has stated on many occasions that the people of Venezuela do not want war but will fight to defend their revolution against any foreign aggressor. The setting up of the reserve and the territorial guards is an attempt to arm the revolution against the threat of foreign intervention. Marxists welcome this step and will support all efforts designed to defend the revolution.

The UNT should participate in this effort by setting up workers' defence units in every workplace organised by the mass workers' assemblies and accountable to them. Every worker, peasant and student must learn how to use arms. The whole history of the revolution proves that the masses are the only consistent defenders of the revolution. Special schools should be set up to train military cadres from the ranks of the workers and peasants. There are plenty of revolutionary officers in the army who can educate and train the workers in military skills.

The reformists argue that such things will only provoke the imperialists and increase the danger of invasion. On the contrary! The more workers who learn how to use weapons, the broader layers of the population that are drawn into the task of military training, the greater the deterrent for imperialist aggressors and the greater the chance of a peaceful outcome. Let our slogan be that of the Roman Republic: "Si pacem vis, para bellum" - if you want peace, prepare for war.

For an internationalist policy!
A revolution that speaks in the name of Simon Bolivar must fight to carry out Bolivar's programme - the revolutionary unification of Latin America. But under modern conditions this can only be realised through a Socialist Federation of Latin America. An appeal should be made to the peoples of Latin America and the world to follow Venezuela's revolutionary road.

There are those who say that the revolution has gone far enough, that it is time to call a halt. That is not the spirit that motivated Simon Bolivar and his followers! They were not afraid to challenge the greatest powers on earth, even though they started with a tiny handful.

It is not enough to proclaim the revolution: the revolution must pass from words to deeds; otherwise, it will lead to scepticism and apathy, creating the conditions for counterrevolution. The revolution cannot stand still, or it will be defeated. It must march boldly forward, conquering one position after another.

It is not enough just to talk about socialism, while the land and banks remain in the hands of the landlords and capitalists. It is necessary to finish what has been started. A revolutionary leadership that is not prepared to go to the end is doomed to play a fatal role. In that case, it would have been better not to have started the revolution in the first place.

In the final analysis, the future of the Bolivarian Revolution will be determined by the degree to which it spreads to the rest of Latin America and beyond. That idea was understood by Che Guevara, when he said that the Cuban Revolution could only be saved by creating "one, two, three, many Vietnams".

US imperialism is a powerful enemy. It has colossal reserves. But the Venezuelan Revolution has even bigger potential reserves - the support of millions of oppressed and exploited workers and peasants in Latin America who see the Bolivarian Revolution as a ray of hope in the darkness. To the degree that the revolution takes bold steps forward, striking blows against its enemies and forcing the counterrevolutionary oligarchy and imperialism onto the defensive, the confidence and militancy of the masses will grow everywhere.

Already the revolutionary movement is spreading to other countries, as we see in the election of Evo Morales in Bolivia and the extraordinary movement against electoral fraud in Mexico. Peru and Ecuador are not far behind. What is needed is a bold lead, a decisive step to eradicate landlordism and capitalism in Venezuela once and for all. Once that step is taken, the revolutionary flame will spread like a forest fire to one country after another.

If the Bolivarian revolution is to succeed, it must spread to other countries, starting with a Socialist Federation of Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia. Its message will soon spread to other countries, including the USA, where discontent is growing by the hour.

Against opportunism! Against sectarianism!
On the eve of the Second Battle of Santa Ines, the Revolution stands at the crossroads. The masses, and particularly the vanguard, are beginning to tire of talk and speeches. Lenin once warned that talk and rhetoric has destroyed more than one revolution. It is time to translate the speeches into action! Only by carrying out a revolution within the revolution can the danger of counterrevolution be averted. But this is only possible on the basis of a Marxist policy.

Marx and Engels long ago pointed out that the Communists do not form a party separate and opposed to other working class parties. The Marxists are the most advanced part of the workers' movement. All revolutionary Marxists must strive to unite the masses around the programme of the socialist revolution, expressed as a series of transitional demands, from the smallest economic, social or democratic demand to the conquest of power. We must strive to build links to the mass of the workers, peasants and revolutionary youth who today are to be found in the ranks of the Bolivarian Movement.

Our first task is to unite the proletarian vanguard - the most advanced elements of the workers and youth - around the transitional programme of the socialist revolution. But we must not separate ourselves from the mass of revolutionary Bolivarians who wish to fight the twin dangers of counterrevolution and imperialism. The comrades of the Revolutionary Marxist Current (CMR) have started this work and must be fully supported by Marxists all over the world.

Those sectarians who dedicate all their time to attacking Chavez and splitting the revolutionary movement only discredit the name of Marxism in the eyes of the masses. Marx and Engels, the founders of scientific socialism, explained long ago in the Communist Manifesto that the place where Communists must work is inside the mass movement, not outside it. Let us speak clearly: outside the Bolivarian Movement (that is to say, outside the movement of the masses in Venezuela) there is nothing.

The imperialists and counterrevolutionaries understand the importance of the Bolivarian Movement and are trying to undermine it from within, using corruption to create a Fifth Column in the leadership of the Movement. The struggle against the counterrevolution is therefore impossible without a resolute struggle against opportunist wing of the Movement and the pro-bourgeois elements in the leadership.

The only way to defeat the counterrevolution and lead the masses towards the socialist transformation of society is to conduct a determined struggle against the right wing of the Bolivarian Movement, to drive out the opportunists, careerists and bureaucrats and to transform the movement into a revolutionary instrument capable of actually leading the masses.

The best leaders of the Movement are those who come from the masses and have no interest except to defend the interests of the masses, not professional politicians and bureaucrats. We demand that the salaries of the leaders should be limited to no more than those of a skilled worker. All expenses must be open to inspection by the rank and file, and all leaders must be elected by the rank and file and subject to recall.

In order to wage a serious struggle against opportunism and bureaucracy the proletarian vanguard must be organised. This is the most urgent task of the Venezuelan Marxists, who must fight side by side with the rest of the mass movement, dealing blows against the class enemy, while simultaneously explaining to the most advanced workers and peasants the meaning of events and patiently explaining the programme of revolutionary socialism in language that is accessible to the masses. That is the task that the CMR, the Venezuelan section of the International Marxist Tendency has before it.

The destiny of the Venezuelan Revolution is organically tied to the perspectives of the Marxist tendency. The Marxists will stand or fall according to their ability to penetrate the Bolivarian Movement and win it to the programme of revolutionary socialism. And the Bolivarian Movement will stand or fall according to its ability to transcend the limits of the bourgeois democratic revolution, expropriate the oligarchy and carry out the socialist revolution, not in words but in deeds.

[This statement was passed at the World Congress of the International Marxist Tendency in Barcelona, in August 2006]

CommunismForever

21st September 2006, 18:30

Hi Comrades,

Has anyone seen the documentary El Gusano De Luz?
it's a counter documentary about Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution regarding the Revolution will not be televised documentary.
I'd like to be able to counter the claims that are made in El Gusano De luz. Does anyone have any information on this?

www.elgusanodeluz.com

OneBrickOneVoice

24th September 2006, 22:58

What about Venezula's desacato laws?

CommunismForever

28th September 2006, 22:46

The link to the El Gusano De Luz is here-

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...0&q=Hugo+Chavez (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-3378761249364089950&q=Hugo+Chavez)

Louis Pio

25th October 2006, 02:30

Just to preserve the discussion, here's a thread from revleft on the occupation of the coca cola factories in venezuela Coca Cola Occupation Thread (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=57714)

Louis Pio

25th November 2006, 12:01

An interview and some articles here up to the election:

20,000 peasants march in Caracas for 10 million votes for Chavez and for Socialism (http://www.marxist.com/ezequiel-zamora-march231106.htm)

US Socialist Appeal Interviews FRETECO Activist Miguel Campos (http://www.marxist.com/miguel-campos-interview231106.htm)

Hands off Venezuela launched in Venezuela! (http://www.marxist.com/hov-launch-venezuela241106.htm)

Sanitarios Maracay workers elect a Factory Committee to manage the company and struggle for expropriation - Alan Woods visits the factory (http://www.marxist.com/sanitarios-maracay-woods241106.htm)

Louis Pio

29th November 2006, 19:20

Venezuelan elections: "No Volveran!" ["They shall not return!"] - But masses demand action against the counterrevolution (http://www.marxist.com/venezuelan-elections291106.htm)

Venezuelan elections: "No Volveran!" ["They shall not return!"] - But masses demand action against the counterrevolution
By Alan Woods
Wednesday, 29 November 2006
"December 3, 2006 will remain in history painted red." (Hugo Chavez)

Marx pointed out that the revolution needs the whip of the counterrevolution. After the big opposition rally on Saturday, the supporters of Hugo Chávez responded massively last Sunday with the biggest demonstration since the start of the Bolivarian Revolution. It was possibly the biggest demonstration in the history of Venezuela. The left wing website Aporrea referred to "the red tsunami". Up to two million Chavistas, in a sea of red, poured onto the streets and filled the Avenida Bolívar - and the whole of Caracas ‑ where Chávez was to deliver his final speech of the election campaign.

November 26, 2006 saw the closing rally of what has been, to all accounts, an unremarkable electoral campaign. According to well-informed sources in Caracas, the entire campaign had been taken over by the MVR bureaucracy, and, as any worker knows, anything that is taken over by the bureaucracy - whether it is a strike or an election campaign - will end badly.

This has been the whole story of the Bolivarian Revolution from the very beginning. The real motor-force has been the masses - the millions of workers and peasants who, unlike the bureaucrats and careerists, are devoted to the revolution with every fibre of their being. At every critical juncture when the revolution was threatened by the counterrevolutionary forces - the Venezuelan oligarchy and its backers in Washington, it was the masses who rallied to save it from certain defeat.

That was the case in the coup of April 2002, the bosses' lockout that followed, and the recall referendum. The strength of Hugo Chavez, and the secret of his success, is that he embodies the revolutionary aspirations of the masses and gives voice to their deep desire for a fundamental change in society. He has awakened millions of people to political life and for the first time has given them hope of a change, a sense of dignity and purpose.

There are left sectarians, who for some strange reason imagine that they are Marxists, who do not understand this phenomenon. They impotently curse as the masses express their unshakable loyalty to the President. They shake their heads in disbelief, like the first European who saw a giraffe and exclaimed: "I don't believe it!"

But for the ordinary Venezuelan worker or peasant, it is really a very simple matter. The choice before them this coming Sunday is the choice between revolution and counterrevolution. There are no "ifs" or "buts" about it. If Rosales and his gang succeed in defeating Chavez and taking the reins of government back into their hands, the perspective for the masses would be black indeed.

In order that the revolution should advance it is necessary first to clear a number of obstacles out of its path. It is necessary to inflict a massive defeat on the counterrevolutionary opposition this Sunday. This would demoralize and weaken the forces of reaction, raise the self-confidence and fighting spirit of the masses and strengthen the revolutionary wing. One really has to be blind not to understand this elementary fact. But there are none so blind as those who will not see.

The Venezuelan workers and peasants, unlike the sectarian ignoramuses, have consistently demonstrated a very high level of revolutionary consciousness. That is why, yet again, they poured into the streets by the millions last Sunday, completely filling Avenida Bolivar (the widest and most important thoroughfare), as well as dozens of neighbouring streets and avenues.

As significant as the huge numbers involved was the mood of the demonstrators. An eyewitness from the HOV delegation in Caracas points out: "The place was totally jam packed. The mood was electric, joyous, confident, and determined". It is this mood of revolutionary determination that will ensure the victory of Chavez on December 3rd, and nothing else.

Stages in the revolution
Every revolution in history passes through well-defined stages. Although the Bolivarian Revolution has certain peculiarities and unique features (which revolution does not?) it shares with past revolutions the essential features that repeat themselves in every instance with extraordinary regularity. The names of individual leaders and parties change, as does the speed with which events unfold (somebody once told me that the Bolivarian Revolution was "a revolution in slow motion"). But the underlying processes are very similar.

In every revolution there is an initial phase of euphoria, where the masses imagine that victory has been achieved and all their problems solved. There is a kind of carnival atmosphere in which almost everybody seems to participate. The idea of national unity predominates. This was the mood that we saw in Russia in February 1917, in Spain after the fall of the Monarchy in April 1931, and even in the French Revolution (which has certain similarities with Venezuela) after the fall of the Bastille in July 1789.

But after some time, the masses learn some unpalatable truths from their experience. The idea begins to take shape, starting with the vanguard, that all is not well, that the real objectives of the revolution have not been achieved, and that the aspirations of the masses have not been realised. The mood of euphoria dissipates, like the effects of alcohol the morning after a party. The experience of a hangover is never very pleasant. But it prepares for a more sober and realistic appraisal of the facts of life.

In Venezuela, the first stage of the revolution has already passed into history and will not return. There is a growing awareness that the most decisive battles still lie ahead, that the most fundamental problems remain to be solved. That was shown recently by the demonstration of peasants organized by the Ezequiel Zamora Peasants' National Front. After eight years of the Bolivarian Revolution, about 75 percent of the land remains in the hands of the big landowners, 166 peasant activists have been murdered by the hired assassins of the landlords and not one of the murderers has been sent to prison. But then, not one of those responsible for the April 2002 coup is behind bars either. People are asking: is this any way to conduct a revolution?

There is an increasingly critical mood among the masses, and especially among the activists who have most to fear from a victory of the counterrevolution. But this mood of criticism is not directed against the President, who most people recognise as a sincere and courageous man who is prepared to confront the oligarchy and imperialism. But there is an implacable hatred towards the landlords and capitalists and towards the corrupt bureaucrats who constitute the Fifth Column of the counterrevolution. And there is a deep and growing mistrust of those who surround the President and cut him off from the people and are striving to water down the socialist message and hold the revolution back.

The "left" critics of Chavez point to his hesitations and inconsistency. But the contradictory messages that come out of Miraflores reflect the contradictions in the Bolivarian Movement itself. The rank and file Bolivarians are overwhelmingly rooted in the working class, the peasantry and the urban poor. They instinctively support the ideas of revolutionary socialism and are loudly demanding serious measures against the oligarchy.

However, the higher up you go, the more diffuse the revolutionary message becomes. While a section of the ministers and deputies are in favour of socialism, the right wing is entrenched in the bureaucracy, which Chavez himself has described as a counterrevolutionary bureaucracy and the biggest danger that confronts the revolution. This counterrevolutionary bureaucracy reflects the pressure of the oligarchy and imperialism.

It would be foolish to imagine that the CIA is not directly involved in hatching plots and conspiracies in this wing, making use of its considerable resources to corrupt a layer of functionaries (many of whom need little persuasion) to involve them in counterrevolutionary intrigues against the revolution and the President. The slogan of these people is "Chavism without Chavez" - to which the masses respond with slogans like those we saw in the recent demonstration of 12,000 activists in Merida: "With Chavez to socialism!" and even more significant: "With Chavez against the bureaucracy!"

Bankruptcy of reformism
Lenin once said that for the masses an ounce of practice is worth a ton of theory (and he was a great theoretician). The masses in general do not learn from books but from their own experience. Since in a revolution the experience of the masses is enormously accelerated, they learn very quickly. In such circumstances, the workers and peasants learn more in 24 hours than in ten years of normal life.

In the last few years a veritable army of reformist "intellectuals" has descended on Caracas like a Biblical plague of locusts. They are ex-Communists (some of them, though not many, still have the audacity to call themselves Communists), ex-Maoists, ex-Trotskyists, ex-guerrillas, and ex-anything-else-you-care-to-name. They are also Social Democrats, either of the usual brand or disguised Social Democrats from organizations like Attac or Le Monde Diplomatique. All have one thing in common: their violent hostility to Marxism and revolutionary socialism.

These ladies and gentlemen have a profound contempt for the masses, who they consider insufficiently educated to carry out the social revolution. They constantly refer to the alleged "low level of consciousness of the masses" as an argument against the viability of socialist revolution in Venezuela. Others assure us that we are "still in the stage of the bourgeois-democratic revolution" (despite President Chavez's repeated declarations in favour of socialism). Still others try to frighten the masses with the spectre of imperialist intervention ("if we try to go too far too fast"), etc., etc.

The reformists never lack arguments against the viability of socialism. But we have heard all this before. The Russian Mensheviks (and the right wing Bolsheviks including Stalin) never tired of warning Lenin in 1917 that there were "no objective conditions for a socialist revolution", that they were "still in the stage of the bourgeois-democratic revolution" an so on and so forth. And on the surface, these arguments carried some weight. Tsarist Russia was an extremely backward country where the industrial working class was only four million out of a total population of 150 million. Yet Lenin and Trotsky brushed aside the dire warnings of the reformists and led the working class to the conquest of power.

The conditions in Venezuela are infinitely more favourable for socialist revolution than they were in Russia in 1917. The working class is far more numerous and the masses have been schooled in eight years of revolution. The vast majority are ready for the revolutionary transformation of society. What is lacking is precisely the presence of a revolutionary party and leadership like the Bolshevik Party under Lenin and Trotsky.

As a matter of fact, despite the whining of the reformists, the objective conditions for carrying out the socialist revolution in Venezuela are extremely favourable. Inside Venezuela the resurgence of the opposition is more apparent than real. With the considerable financial resources at their disposal (generously supplemented by an infusion of dollars from Washington), the opposition has succeeded in creating the illusion in sections of the middle class that they can defeat Chavez. Encouraged by this illusion, the well-off sections of Caracas society rallied to applaud Manuel Rosales last Saturday.

But this illusion was immediately shattered by the enormous show of force of the masses the following day. Even numerically, the demonstration of the escualidos was dwarfed by the Chavistas. However, the question of the real class balance of forces cannot be reduced to a question of parliamentary arithmetic. The multi-coloured, heterogeneous petty bourgeoisie cannot compare as a fighting force with the compact masses of workers and peasants. It is like comparing a butterfly with a bull. If it came to a serious test of forces, the middle class heroes of the counterrevolution would be scattered like straw in the wind. Moreover, they know this very well.

Behind the loud cheers of the opposition rally lies desperation, fear, and a profound sense of impotence. The leaders of the opposition are firmly convinced that they will be soundly defeated at the polls on 3 December. Long ago they abandoned all hope of defeating Chavez through the medium of voting and parliamentary elections. They have concluded that the question of power will be settled outside parliament - on the streets, in the factories, on the land and in the army barracks.

It must be admitted that, in their calculations, the political representatives of the ruling class are far more realistic and perspicacious than the theoreticians of reformism. The latter are hypnotised by the game of parliamentary politics. They believe that the class struggle between mutually irreconcilable interests can be decided by laws and constitutions, in the same way that a game of chess is regulated by ancient rules, or a game of baseball by the referee. But revolution is not a game, and it has no rules other than those determined by the class balance of forces at a given moment.

The Bolivarian Constitution is in many ways a fine document (although with a fatal weakness on the question of private property). But it is the reflection of the class balance of forces at the time it was approved, and can be consigned to the dustbin when the balance of forces changes. How long would the Constitution remain in being once the counterrevolutionaries returned to Miraflores? The question answers itself. Therefore, those who put all their faith in laws and constitutions and do not understand the mechanics of the class struggle that determine such things are leaning on a broken straw. Cicero stated long ago that the safety of the People is the Supreme Law. We will bring Cicero up to date by stating bluntly: the safety of the Revolution is the Supreme Law, to which everything else must be subordinated. To adopt any other standpoint is to take a frivolous attitude to revolution that can only end in the greatest calamities.

Imperialist interference
The events in Caracas are being followed with growing alarm and chagrin by the imperialists. The tone of the statements coming out of Washington has become increasingly belligerent. In January 2005 Condoleezza Rice stated: "Chavez is a negative force in the region". The same song was repeated in different keys by the US media and other officials in the US government. By January 2006, US Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and then-defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld compared Chavez to Hitler, and accused him of being one of the most dangerous and destabilising forces in the region.

This is the kind of language that is normally associated in diplomacy with preparations for war. In the past, US imperialism would have intervened militarily against the Bolivarian Revolution. But times have changed. Despite all their power and wealth, the US imperialists are not in any position to stage a direct military intervention. They are trapped in a quagmire in Iraq that has already cost the lives of 3,000 US soldiers and is costing them more than a billion dollars a week.

The recent elections in the USA dealt a shattering blow to Bush and the Republican Party, which lost control of both Houses of Congress. There is plainly a mood in the US public in favour of ending this disastrous occupation, although to withdraw now would be a humiliating defeat that would have serious consequences for the USA in the Middle East and on a world scale. Whatever they do now in Iraq will be wrong. And the same is true of Afghanistan. Therefore, it is unthinkable that they begin another military adventure in Venezuela, particularly bearing in mind that 70 percent of the Latino population of the USA (now the biggest ethnic minority) voted against Bush in these elections.

Does this mean that the imperialists have given up their attempts to overthrow Chavez? Of course not! The USA has already launched an invasion of Venezuela, one left wing government official told me: a dollar invasion. The CIA is actively engaged in corrupting certain elements in the state - including some "Bolivarians".

This is confirmed by Eva Golinger in her new book, Bush vs Chavez: Washington's War on Venezuela, detailing the current US threats to Venezuela. In a recent interview Eva Golinger stated that US imperialism was financing the opposition: "This has increased over the past year, doubled in some instances. In fact, funding by USAID [the US Agency for International Development], through its Office of Transition Initiatives (set up here after the coup), is now up to US$7.5 million a year. But, more interestingly, the recipients of the funding have increased dramatically.

"Two years ago, there were about 63 organisations receiving funding and, today, according to the latest documents I've gotten under the US Freedom of Information Act, there are 132 groups. When we talk about financial power, it's not just the money; it's about the penetration of Venezuelan society by using money to get into the various sectors. They find groups that are allegedly human rights groups, groups that work in the education system and so on, but are really working for the opposition.

"Basically, the US is funding these organisations in civil society ... to obtain control in all different parts of the country. There are large concentrations of programs in Merida, for example, also in Tachira, Zulia, and then in the interior of the country - places like Barquisimeto, and the states of Lara, Monagas, and Anzoategui." (Green Left Weekly, issue #691, 22 November 2006.)

Bush's new Plan for Transition in Cuba is being financed to the tune of about $80 million. In Venezuela, the total amount of money from Washington that can be traced is about $9 million a year. But it is not only the money (which the oligarchy does not really need) but also the political contacts, as Eva Golinger points out:

"It's the political contacts as well. For instance, on October 28, a right-wing think-tank, closely tied to the Republican Party, is hosting an event in Washington, DC, called ‘Can Venezuela be saved?' And the only speaker is Julio Borges, who is the opposition vice-presidential candidate with [presidential candidate] Manuel Rosales. All sorts of things are involved with what I call the ‘financial front'."

Although a direct invasion appears to be ruled out, there are other options. One is assassination. We know that the CIA is training terrorists in Miami for the purpose of murdering Chavez. Colombian paramilitaries are active on Venezuelan soil and they are not there to play games. Eva Golinger says:

"I actually interviewed a paramilitary here in Caracas. What he told me is that all the paramilitaries work jointly with the US and the Special Forces in Colombia. They're trained by them, in command-and-control operations. [...] they're the ones sent over to try to assassinate Chavez. But the command-and-control is directed and controlled by the US Special Forces. The US forces come in, and are on the ground in Colombia, but they send the paramilitaries to do the dirty work, together with the Colombian army." (ibid.)

A paramilitary leader told Eva Golinger that there are more than 3000 in the region of Caracas alone. The USA has turned Colombia into an armed camp, donating 4.5 billion dollars in arms to the reactionary regime of Uribe. This is supposed to be for the war on drugs, but in practice it is for counter-insurgency. It is possible that the CIA might provoke a war between Colombia and Venezuela.

Counterrevolutionary preparations
The immediate plans of the imperialists, however, are connected with the Presidential elections. Opposition candidate Manuel Rosales has been consistently 20-30% behind Chávez in the polls. Some sectors of the opposition - Acción Democrática (AD) and Antonio Ledezma's Alianza Bravo Pueblo have refused to participate in the elections and are calling for abstention. Rosales' democratic credentials are no better than theirs. He participated in the coup of 2002. He was obviously toying with the idea of withdrawing from the elections, but left it too late. To withdraw now would discredit him utterly and demoralize his followers.

The escualidos and their imperialist backers are preparing for a big electoral defeat on Sunday. They have decided in advance to cry "fraud" and use the situation to attempt to cause the maximum destabilization inside the country and the maximum confusion outside. Already 30,000-40,000 black shirts with the word "Fraud!" on them have been discovered. This is a small indication of what is being prepared.

Organizations like the so-called "Hannah Arendt Center" (which is directly linked to the head of the Rosales campaign team) are being used to cast doubt upon the poll even before the first polling station has opened. This is an essential ingredient in the plan to destabilize Venezuela after 3 December.

The opposition is rallying around the slogan of "defend the vote." In an article in CounterPunch, US academic George Ciccariello-Maher writes:

"This vague slogan has some clear consequences, as became clear when opposition ideologue Rafael Poleo appeared recently on Globovisión. Poleo, who has links to the Bush clan and the CIA, who was thoroughly implicated in the April 2002 coup, and whose daughter has been directly implicated in the assassination of Danilo Anderson, the judge whose job it was to collect evidence against the coup-plotters, laid out the strategy of the radical opposition in the clearest of terms on November 6th: ‘On the 3rd, it is up to the citizens to align themselves with the opposition, they need to go and vote. On the 4th, it's up to Manuel Rosales to lead the protests against the fraud that has been set up. And on the 5th, it's up to the Armed Forces to decide if it will continue forcing those in the Venezuelan opposition to put up with a shameful regime.'

"According to Poleo, Rosales could be the most important Venezuelan of the 21st century ‘if he does what he needs to do.' The Electoral Committee (CNE) ‘will announce the victory of Hugo Chávez, regardless of what the numbers say,' and ‘at 6am on the 4th, the streets will fill with people decrying fraud, and then we will see the true size of Rosales.' Revealingly, Poleo declares that "that day after, the 4th, will be even more important than December 3rd. On the 4th, it's up to the people to do what the Ukranians did, to carry out an 'Orange Revolution,' to hurl themselves onto the streets, because the fraud has already been arranged, they already have the numbers ready.' The Chavistas will not abandon power for the simple reason that ‘they are Nazis.'"

These words are neither more nor less than an open call for a coup in Venezuela. Rosales has refused to give clear and unambiguous answers to questions about his recognising the election results. He merely reiterates that the results must be fair. Since for Rosales and his bosses in Washington the only fair result is a victory for the counterrevolutionary opposition, the conclusion is quite clear. If the democratic system cannot deliver a "fair result", it must be overthrown by force.

However, Rosales is well aware that he lacks a mass base strong enough to overthrow the democratically elected government. His only hope is to provoke a military coup with the support of reactionary army officers. It is therefore no surprise that he called on November 5th for a meeting with the military high command, a request that was turned down by Minster of Defense General Raúl Baduel on the basis that such a meeting would constitute an unconstitutional intervention of the military into the electoral process. However, matters will not be allowed to rest there. Nestor González González, the military leader of the April 2002 coup, has released an audiotape calling for the intervention of the military.

These brazen plans of the counterrevolution have met with a firm response from Chavez. He has warned that imperialist attempts to destabilize Venezuela can be met by cutting off oil supplies. He warned the opposition in a speech on November 17th: "don't force me to take drastic measures to safeguard the sovereignty and the stability of the country." Attempts at destabilization would be met with firmness, since "that permissive Chávez was left behind that night in 2002." Chávez concludes: "We won't allow Venezuela to be filled with bloodshed again."

If the words of the President are harsh, the reaction of the rank and file is much harsher. According to the article by George Ciccariello-Maher, the threat of counterrevolution is rousing the Bolivarian activists. Formerly defunct Bolivarian circles are springing to life and the question of armed self-defence is coming to the fore. He refers to "the autonomous organization of Chavistas to defend their revolution. So we shouldn't be surprised to find that the most radical sectors of Chavismo are also making plans. Specifically, several armed self-defense organizations rooted in the Tupamaro movement and largely-defunct Bolivarian Circles, which claim a particularly powerful following in the barrios of western Caracas, are preparing plans for the defense of Chavista neighborhoods.

"Such plans are centered in the historically revolutionary neighborhood of 23 de Enero (January 23rd), in the climbing foothills in western Caracas. 23 de Enero has long represented the organizational ‘brain' of radical Caracas, as opposed to the ‘heart' of revolt represented by the slums of Petare, that powderkeg standing far to the east of the city which gave rise to the epic 1989 Caracazo riots. The spirit of revolt has often been sparked in the utter destitution of Petare, the largest and most dangerous of Caracas' slums, but the organizational structure which fans the flames can generally be found in 23."

Here we have the answer of the masses to the plots of the counterrevolutionaries! Any attempt to repeat the experience of April 11, 2002 will be met by an uprising of the masses that will put that of the 13 April in the shade. This may well give the counterrevolutionaries pause for thought! The author continues:

"It should be pointed out that, while the Metropolitan Mayor's office has "fulfilled a necessary support role" by providing logistical support to radical neighborhoods (cellphones, motorcycles), this role is precisely that: support. That is to say, these neighborhood organizations are best considered as ‘base movements' engaged in a revolutionary process of local administration. In the words of one participant, the resistance to threats from the opposition has led these groups to ‘create new forms for organizing the local self-defense of sovereignty.'"

These plans for resistance are not limited to urban areas. The Ezequiel Zamora National Peasants' Front, several thousand of whom marched through the city in military formation on November 20th, has taken the initiative of organizing a united front of revolutionary organizations, in which the Freteco and the CMR have agreed to participate. The front has appealed for support from Hands off Venezuela, which is organizing solidarity actions in many countries this weekend.

Revolutionary potential of masses
What does all this suggest? Certainly not the nice, peaceful scenario so beloved of all reformists, but of a ferocious struggle between the classes, which must be resolved after the elections. George Ciccariello-Maher concludes correctly: "grassroots resistance to any efforts to put the brakes on the revolutionary process is ubiquitous". The strength of the Venezuelan Revolution remains the masses, who once again showed their determination and revolutionary fighting spirit last Sunday.

The most popular slogan was "No Volveran!" ("They Will not Return!"). What does this slogan show? One might say that the masses still do not know exactly what they want. But they know very well what they do not want. They do not want a return to government of their bitterest enemies. They are determined to fight with all their power to defend the gains of the revolution. But in warfare defensive struggles can often turn into offensive ones. In the words of Winston Churchill, the best form of defence is attack.

This is the land of Simon Bolivar ‑ the front line of the Latin American Revolution. Simon Bolivar, despite the extreme weakness of the forces he originally had at his disposal, did not hesitate to take on the forces of the mighty Spanish empire. He did not moan about "unfavourable conditions" but went over to the attack, and won. If, instead of Bolivar, the movement had been led by reformists of the Heinz Dietrich type, the peoples of Latin America would still be languishing under the yoke of foreign imperialism.

Everywhere we look we see a continent in a state of revolutionary ferment. There is a mass movement involving millions of workers and peasants in Mexico, which has not yet run its course. The workers of Bolivia staged two general strikes and two insurrections in as many years. On the electoral plane, the masses of Ecuador have shown their desire to change society. The result in Nicaragua showed the same thing, despite the hopeless inadequacy of the policies of Ortega.

Everywhere it is the same problem. It is not a problem of the masses, who have shown their desire to change society many times. No! It is the absence of the subjective factor - the revolutionary party and leadership. If such a leadership existed the task of carrying out the revolution would be much easier. It would be carried out more swiftly and painlessly, with a minimum of violence and sacrifices. The protracted nature of the revolution is precisely a reflection of the fact that, on the one hand, the forces of reaction are too weak to effect a counterrevolutionary overthrow (at least for the moment), whereas the masses lack a revolutionary party with the necessary vision and audacity to lead them to the conquest of power. This means that a decisive outcome is postponed. However, the present situation of unstable equilibrium cannot last indefinitely. Sooner or later, the central contradiction must be resolved - one way or the other.

What is needed now is a clear and bold lead from the working class. There is every reason to believe that after these elections there will be a further explosive advance of the class struggle. The workers are no longer prepared to accept the impositions of the bosses, in particular factory closures. The occupation of Sanitarios de Maracay shows the way forward. The formation of Freteco, the revolutionary front, provides the necessary vehicle to give an organized expression to the movement for factory occupations and workers' control.

Can the working class of Venezuela resolve the question of power without the firm guiding hand of a Marxist party? Theoretically, this cannot be excluded. The workers of Paris (who at that time were also much weaker than the workers of Venezuela today) seized power in the Paris Commune without the benefit of a Marxist party (though the followers of Marx were present in the Commune). But we must not forget that they lost power mainly because of mistakes that an experienced leadership would have helped them to avoid. In any case, the masses cannot wait until we have overcome our organizational weaknesses. In Venezuela the revolutionary tendency must be created in the course of the struggle itself. It is an urgent need and must be pursued urgently and single-mindedly by the Venezuelan Marxists.

In the heat of events the creation of a revolutionary leadership can be achieved far more quickly than one might imagine possible. The threat of counterrevolution in Venezuela is galvanizing the revolutionary vanguard. The activists are coming together, discussing, collaborating in the struggle, arming. That is the way! For a revolutionary united front to combat the counterrevolution and push the revolutionary forces! The masses have time after time demonstrated their willingness to fight. Once they are armed with the ideas and programme of revolutionary Marxism, no force on earth can stop them.

Down with the counterrevolutionary oligarchy!
Down with imperialism!
Hands off Venezuela!
Forward to the Socialist Bolivarian Republic!
Forward to the Socialist Federation of Latin America!

bgirlskttlez

31st December 2006, 20:36

There will be an organized protest in California in order to raise awareness reguarding this issue. It will take place February 2007.

Dominicana_1965

6th January 2007, 20:12

http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1927

Interview with Heinz Dieterich
"In Venezuela, Conditions for Building Socialism of the 21st Century Have Been Created"

Q. Professor Dieterich, did you invent the concept of "Socialism of the 21st Century"?

A. Yes. I developed it, beginning in 1996. It has been published with its corresponding theory in book form, from 2000 on, in Mexico, Ecuador, Argentina, Central America, Brazil, and Venezuela, and, outside Latin America, in Spain, Germany, the People's Republic of China, Russia, and Turkey. Since 2001, it has been appropriated all over the world. Presidents like Hugo Chávez and Rafael Correa use it constantly, and so do labor movements, farmers, intellectuals, and political parties.

Along with the theory of socialism of the 21st century, I advanced the theory of Latin American transition that is expressed in key concepts like the Regional Block of Power (Bloque Regional de Poder -- BRP), also already in general use in Latin America. However, the concept Regional Block of Popular Power (Bloque Regional de Poder Popular -- BRPP) was proposed by a Venezuelan friend, Douglas Pérez, in a business meeting three months ago.

Q. In short, what does this new socialism consists of?

A. In brief: a socialism in which the majorities have the greatest historically possible degree of decision-making power in the economic, political, cultural, and military institutions that govern their lives.

Q. There are politicians and intellectuals of the Left who say that nobody knows how to build socialism. Why do you maintain the opposite and why does President Chávez aspire to build what is impossible?

A. Because their pronouncement is totally false. And no matter how often it is repeated, it continues to be false. Contemporary science does not leave any mystery about what socialism of the 21st century is or its difference from contemporary capitalism and historical socialism. Nor about how we ought to construct it nowadays. It is, simply, a mistaken epistemological position.

Q. In your opinion, has there been any socialist country in the modern era?

A. It depends on the criteria that are used for such judgment. As a scientific economist and sociologist, I prefer the parameters that Marx and Engels used: economy of value and participatory democracy. And under those criteria, there has been no socialist society since the French Revolution, although, yes, there have been many heroic and tragic attempts to achieve it.

Q. Do conditions for implementing socialism of the 21st century exist in Venezuela?

A. Yes, now indeed they do. I mention only some. Two thirds of the population voted for the President with full knowledge of his banner of Socialism of the 21st Century. This is a substantial mandate of citizens. The advance of the educational and economic system and of the consciousness of the people has been remarkable. Latin American integration and the destruction of the Monroe Doctrine seem already unstoppable. The Armed Forces now are reliable, and three key sectors of the national economy are in the hands of the government: the State, PdVSA-CVG, and more than one hundred thousand cooperatives.

Q. What would be the decisive step that the President would have to take to arrive at socialism of the 21s century in Venezuela?

A. They are two: 1. to gradually replace the regulating principle of market economy, price, by the regulating principle of socialist economy, value, understood as time inputs (insumos de tiempo) necessary for the creation of a product; and 2. to advance the economic participation of citizens and workers at three levels: 1. at the macroeconomic level (e.g., national budget); 2. at the mesoeconomic level (municipality); and, 3. at the microeconomic level (enterprise).

Q. Is the economy of socialism of the 21st century, then, a barter economy?

A. No. That is as erroneous as the pronouncement that nobody knows how to build socialism of the 21st century. The problem of economic injustice does not lie in money. It has nothing to do with whether economy is monetized or functions through exchange in kind (by barter). In the exploitative relation between slave and master, once the initial payment is amortized, money does not intervene, and yet it is one of the worst brutalities in history.

Injustice exists when a product "A" is exchanged for a product "B," and their values -- the labor time necessary to produce each one of them -- are not equal, that is to say, when equivalents are not exchanged. Whether that exchange of unequal values (unequal labor efforts) is monetized -- that is to say, whether it is expressed in monetary or natural form -- is secondary.

Q. What would be the decisive step of the President, then?

A. It is not generalized nationalization of private property, because it does not solve the cybernetic problem of the market. It did not do so in the past and it would not do so today. Socialism today is essentially a problem of informatic complexity. Hence, the transcendental step consists in establishing socialist accounting (value) next to capitalist accounting (price), in the State, PdVSA-CVG, and cooperatives, in order to construct an economic circuit of production and circulation parallel to that of the capitalist market economy. The economy of state and social institutions can move step by step toward the economy of value and gain ground against the circuit of capitalist reproduction, until it displaces it in the future. Since the scales of valuation by prices, values, and also volumes are commensurable, there are no ruptures in economic exchanges that could cause a political problem to the government. In all this, the State and the majorities play an important role, but both are nowadays mainly with the project of the President.

To create this parallel circuit of the economy of value would be relatively easy, because values exist in underlying form in the present capitalist accounting. Values exist in it in such a way that, with the development of corresponding software, it would be very easy to establish this socialist economic circuit next to the capitalist one. Without this passage to the economy of equivalency, it is not possible to have a socialist economy.

Louis Pio

7th January 2007, 14:30

Hmm Heinz Dieterich has been known for saying the masses wasn't ready for socialism, now he seems to have changed his line a little, still overly "intellectualising" things as always though.

Poum_1936

24th January 2007, 18:51

President Chavez: Nationalize Sanitarios Maracay!

By Hands Off Venezuela
Friday, 19 January 2007

We welcome the recent decisions of Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez to ask for an Enabling Law that will allow for the renationalisation of all privatised companies. This represents a reversal of the economic policies followed by most governments around the world.

We would also like to express our support for the struggle of the workers at the Sanitarios Maracay ceramics factory in Aragua, who have run the factory under workers' control since November last year. We add our signatures to their appeal, and we ask from President Chávez: nationalise Sanitarios Maracay under workers' control!

Solidarity with Sanitarios Maracay workers

Those who sign this petition express our support for the workers of Sanitarios Maracay who, faced with the counter-revolutionary and saboteur behaviour of the employer, the coup plotter Alvaro Pocaterra (who abandoned the factory in an attempt to break the will of the workers' by hunger and desperation), have taken over the instalations and have made them run under workers control, including the sale of bathroom components directly to the communities.

Faced with this situation we ask from the Bolivarian Government, from the members of the National Assembly and those public institutions involved to fully support this struggle, to declare the company to be of public interest and to proceed to its expropriation and nationalisation under the control of the workers.

Send your signatures to [email protected] This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it or fill in the form below!

http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/chavez_na...acay!_2.htm (http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/chavez_nationalise_sanitarios_maracay!_2.htm)

fogao

14th February 2007, 18:46

Visit www.aporrea.org the portal of young Venezuelan revolutionaries, there is a forum!!! They are great people, with will to discuss the most difficult questions of the Venezuelan revolution.
But they want to post in Spanish only.

Link to the forum:
http://www.puebloalzao.net/~aporrea/forum/...e596d4ff3d9ae7a (http://www.puebloalzao.net/~aporrea/forum/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=7b0d35ba8d4eeb0bde596d4ff3d9ae7a)

http://www.puebloalzao.net/~aporrea/forum/

Cheg

17th February 2007, 20:20

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2004 04:53 pm
Aright,

The Revolutionary situation in Venezuela is getting deeper by the day, and it is our duty to know what is going on in the workers struggle against Reaction and Capitalism in Venezuela, and more importantly to spread this to the wider Labour movement internationally.

Basics on the beginning:
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venezuela_eyewitness0103.html
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venezuelan_...nists_shot.html (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venezuelan_trade_unionists_shot.html)
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/venez_year_after.html
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/ven_econ_sabotage.html

Recent News:
http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org
http://www.marxist.com/venezuela.asp
http://www.vheadline.com/
http://www.aporrea.org/
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/

I think it is important to recognise that for to long we have seen Revolution as a theoretical possibility, or a historical thing, or something we only dream of, but this is it, for most of us, really the first time in our lives where we see a class struggle on a national and international basis.

If anyone has any more links pass them on, and i will edit this post, if there is any news from any site post it up for discussion and so we can see what is going on.

No to US intervention in Venezuela!
Defend the Venezuelan revolution!
Forward to Socialism!
Bonjour tout le monde,
Il était temps que l'Amérique latine se réveille.
Maintenant la Bolivie, c'est la revanche du Che.

The Beat

19th February 2007, 22:50

Originally posted by [email protected] 14, 2007 06:46 pm
Visit www.aporrea.org the portal of young Venezuelan revolutionaries, there is a forum!!! They are great people, with will to discuss the most difficult questions of the Venezuelan revolution.
But they want to post in Spanish only.

Link to the forum:
http://www.puebloalzao.net/~aporrea/forum/...e596d4ff3d9ae7a (http://www.puebloalzao.net/~aporrea/forum/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=7b0d35ba8d4eeb0bde596d4ff3d9ae7a)

http://www.puebloalzao.net/~aporrea/forum/
Nice forum. I might join in the discussions there. Good find.

Cheng,

Bonjour tout le monde,
Il était temps que l'Amérique latine se réveille.
Maintenant la Bolivie, c'est la revanche du Che.

Je suis entièrement d'accord avec toi. La révanche est presque complète. Che était un grand homme, et on est en train de vivre ses idées.

revolutionaryspirit

24th February 2007, 11:25

ı hope this revolution will be very useful for workers against capitalists and faschists be cause every country needs a revolution to have their independent and if ım a revolutionary ı want a large revolution like in turkey, you know ataturk was the revolutionary in modern turkey and every country needs revolutionaries like this man becausethe way of left vill only provide due to this kind of men

revolutionaryspirit

24th February 2007, 11:27

heyy ım new here and ı want to know about you lets introduce yourself and then me OK

RedAnarchist

25th February 2007, 13:09

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 11:27 am
heyy ım new here and ı want to know about you lets introduce yourself and then me OK
Please don't post posts like that in the Politics forum. If you wish to introduce yourself, you can make a new thread here - Introductions (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showforum=13)

intransit

3rd March 2007, 20:22

Chavez is an autocrat, and no friend of any true socialist--- it appears no one in these forums actually is. Folks, the man is nuts, and he's appointing himself the new Autocratic Dictator of Venezuela. Now, I would say that is far more fascist than neoconservatives. Which brings me to say, how come no one on these forums is capable of anything but neocon bashing and chanting "communism" or "anarchism"? Isn't anyone capable of actually conjuring up something intelligent, ie: a system that works?
Guess not.
~Proud to be American, Proud to be a Trotskyist, Proud to promote Westernism, Proud to fight Ignorance~

VukBZ2005

3rd March 2007, 22:46

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 03:22 pm
Chavez is an autocrat, and no friend of any true socialist--- it appears no one in these forums actually is. Folks, the man is nuts, and he's appointing himself the new Autocratic Dictator of Venezuela. Now, I would say that is far more fascist than neoconservatives. Which brings me to say, how come no one on these forums is capable of anything but neocon bashing and chanting "communism" or "anarchism"? Isn't anyone capable of actually conjuring up something intelligent, ie: a system that works?
Guess not.
How is he appointing himself the "Autocratic dictator of Venezuela" exactly? :wacko:

Maybe you have been watching American media outlets too much because I do not see the point in saying such when he has consistently proposed to build a "communal state" with the use of the community councils that he has been encouraging people to set up throughout Venezuela and when he has consistently proposed to establish a United Socialist Party of Venezuela, which is by the way, being built from the bottom, not a jammed-up union of political parties.

If he wanted to take power in the way that you are proclaiming, as is the opposition, he would have taken massive and definitive steps towards that already, like for example, crushing all of the factory occupations that have been happening in the past year.

I believe you need to actually look at the information that is coming directly from Venezuela before you make totally ridiculous and unwarranted assumptions.

Die Neue Zeit

7th April 2007, 17:11

The way I see Chavez: he has historical parallels to Sun Yat-sen (unifying South America vs. unifying China). He is no Marxist to be sure, but is as socialist leaning as the Chinese revolutionary. Dealings with Chavez and his United Socialist Party of Venezuela should be like Soviet dealings with Sun Yat-sen and the Guomindang of his era.

abrupt

7th April 2007, 20:49

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2004 08:23 pm
latin america was always a place that spreads revolutionary thoughts and social ideas but it faces the same thing that we arabs face which is bad goverments, yes most of latin americans love chavez but there is this minority with it's big resources and the U.S cover they have the great control, and chavez as castro is a pain in there back so i am not surprised if they managed to get rid of chavez and his revolution cause what supports him are the working class and the working class unfortunatly support him like they support cendrella when she lost her shoe just sit and cheer or cry.
in 50 years the capatlists killed the arabic dream due to our carelessness and dreamy thinking and they returned us 200 years. i think now specially after this oil price crisis the the 21 century latin dream will soon be broken unless you learned from the other nations mistake and became practicaly positive. words must be changed to work and tongues must be changed to guns.

viva la resistance
viva iraq viva palestine
after the US pulls out, they might try at a push to "stop communistic evil" in venezuela. cosidering theyve privitized oil and almost done putting in pipelines overseas.

Cheung Mo

8th April 2007, 17:11

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 04:11 pm
The way I see Chavez: he has historical parallels to Sun Yat-sen (unifying South America vs. unifying China). He is no Marxist to be sure, but is as socialist leaning as the Chinese revolutionary. Dealings with Chavez and his United Socialist Party of Venezuela should be like Soviet dealings with Sun Yat-sen and the Guomindang of his era.
I disagree with your analysis: While Dr. Sun Yat-sen claimed both Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln (laugh all you want, but he's the closest thing the USA has ever had to a socialist President...He even corrsponded with Marx and recognised the validity of the labour theory of value.) as being among his primary influences, he was a left-liberal bourgeois nationalist who lacked any sort of internationalist perspective and had no intention of going any further than the first stage of the discredited two stage theory of the Mensheviks; in other words, he didn't give a flying fuck about the proletarian, the peasantry, or the lumpenproletarian: He merely wanted to build a China whose bourgeoisie was an imperialist agent and a component of the global ruling class rather than subservient to both the national aristocracy and pro-emperor warlords (although he had no problem working with warlords whose material interests were better represented by the national bourgeoisie than by either the aristocracy or the foreign imperialists) and the foreign imperialists that had been plundering China for centuries.

Chavez, in contrast is internationalist in outlook and seeks to apply Trotsky's theories of permanent revolution to Venezuela's material conditions (the circles, the missions, and the militants who lead them while simultaneously fighting forces of reaction represent the Vanguard that is leading the Bolivarian Revolution) and then export this revolution throughout Latin America. But while I remain a strident supporter of Chavez, I am not entirely uncritical of his policies: I dislike that he is compensating many of the capitalists from whom his government and the oeople have expropriated land and the means of production and I question his wisdom in dealing with Ortega (whom I view as a bourgeois reactionary who will put the material interests of foreign imperialists and of the Vatican above his own people) and with Beijing (a risky transient alliance with a bourgeois crony-capitalist regime whose membership in the global ruling class cannot be denied), and I know that he is considerably more socially conservative than I am. Nonetheless, I do support the creation of a United Socialist Party as a means of preventing reactionary bureaucrats who have infiltrated the revolutionary movement from either pushing Venezuela back into the dominion of Western imperialists or launching a coup that would result in a severely deformed caricature of a Worker's State in which it is the ruling class and uses socialist rhetoric solely as a means of protecting its privileged position.

Die Neue Zeit

9th April 2007, 04:11

^^^ Then how come the BANKS haven't been nationalized after so long? Either Chavez doesn't know the Paris Commune episode, or the bankers are "patriotic" enough to back him (remember, South Americans want their own continental monopoly).

In regards to the United Socialist Party, I suggest a two-party system ("two Bolshevik parties," as Lenin said): the aforementioned party and the PCV. Podemos should shut up and fold, along with Fatherland for All.

Either way, in spite of my comparison, it is a win-win situation in the long-run, going exactly according to Lenin's stuff about monopoly capitalism (minus the questionably outdated colonialism part, but his main point there was the political division among the great imperialist powers into blocs).

In terms of the PCV and transitions to socialism in general, I do believe that the transition from "revolutionary" stamocap (top of the business "hourglass" environment being public domain and the smaller businesses still there) to socialism will be much slower than monopoly capitalism to said stamocap.

[And I'm not laughing about Lincoln. ;) Even ultra-propertarian websites call him "the American Lenin."]