Congratulations!

[DORRI]

hello,comrades!
I'm really excited that i can't say anything,what about you?

Monday, Aug 16, 2004

By: Martin Sanchez, Venezuelanalysis.com

Caracas, Venezuela. Aug 16. (Venezuelanalysis.com).- At 4:03AM, Venezuela's National Electoral Council (CNE) announced that according to preliminary results, Venezuelan opposition to President Hugo Chavez will continue his term until 2006.

(excuse me,I copy-pasted it from the newswire!)

[Fidelbrand]

y con Chavez decimos, " Viva Venezuela~!"

I'm glad the people made a wise decision.

[Louis Pio]

Now it seems the pathetic opposition is claiming electoral fraud, as one could expect.
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=22445

The carter center has however aknowlegded the result. So the opposition will get a hard time with their patetic attempt.
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=22444

[Louis Pio]

A lil pic

[fernando]

VIVA VENEZUELA! VIVA CHAVEZ! VIVA LA REVOLUCION!

[DaCuBaN]

http://www.vheadline.com/graf/Gaviria_Cesar_06.jpg


With the notable exception of OAS Secretary General, former Colombian president Cesar Gaviria, the observer corps has expressed satisfaction with the recall referendum results

Don't you just hate a sore loser? :D

[YKTMX]

Vive la Refomism! :P

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 02:01 PM
VIVA VENEZUELA! VIVA CHAVEZ! VIVA LA REVOLUCION!
oh dear lord!

[The Feral Underclass]

can i have first dibs on chavez' son.....thanks

[fernando]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 16 2004, 12:57 PM
oh dear lord!
:P sorry...Im just happy that Chavez won....Im hoping this will be a new and better thing for Latin America as a whole...I mean if things go better in Venezuela, more countries will vote for non-Yankee-lapdog governments...

But ok, the US knows this too and will try to sabotage this of course...since they need to have their "backyard" safe

[The Feral Underclass]

Nothing can "go better" in venezuela until the workers have overthrown chavez and all his pseudo marxist cronies and replace the state and its institutions with federated workers control.

[Louis Pio]

Well they don't really need to overthrow Chavez if he follows what they will. If he goes the opposite direction they would have too.
What wont get us anywere in Venezuela is however a secterian approach to what is happening there.

[DaCuBaN]

Nothing can "go better" in venezuela until the workers have overthrown chavez and all his pseudo marxist cronies and replace the state and its institutions with federated workers control

What's to say he won't try to do this for them? You know I'm no leninist and hence have no faith in the ability of others to do for us, but we can't assume he won't try. We certainly can't bash him until we know for certain.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 03:44 PM

What's to say he won't try to do this for them? You know I'm no leninist and hence have no faith in the ability of others to do for us, but we can't assume he won't try. We certainly can't bash him until we know for certain.
Invariably, this kind of this will always fail. There will be no liberation for anyone.

[h&s]

But surely attempted liberation is always better than up-front enslavery? In reality I don't support Chavez, but I think that by giving the people a limited view of what leftism means for the country will hopefully leave them wanting more.

[Louis Pio]

Invariably, this kind of this will always fail. There will be no liberation for anyone.

He has the active support of the workers and poor. What you are in fact saying is that socialism is not possible.
What we see in Venezuela is a mass movement of workers and poor people. The reformist wing in the top is getting more and more discredited among the rank and file. Many people see the need for breaking with capitalism.
Maybe the situation don't correspond to some abstract idea you have, it is however what we need to work from. It would of course be nice if all massmovements were textbook examples, it is however not the case.

[Morpheus]

GLOBALIZATION TO PASSAGE OF WINNERS
by Rafael Uzcátegui

In our country the agenda of the movement is fulfilled
antiglobalization by those who before the world says leaders of the
fight against the neoliberalism. When Chávez and the rest of their
civil employees make incendiary proclamations against the
"Empire" and the "Neoliberalism", to the few days they sign
generous contracts with directors of multinationals. In a Caribbean
country called Venezuela, the coherence between which it says and
what it becomes surpasses the revelations of Ripley. The 27 of
February of 1989 the first scrambled one of spread against the
application of the neoliberalism policies was made in Venezuela.
That was not product of the chance, was the result of an increasing
conscience between ample layers of the population that a way to
order the society was arriving at its aim. That went a rejection to the
results of the friendship agreement and governability made between
the political parties of the status, the Armed Forces and the Church
made specific in the call Pacto de Punto Fijo, after the fall of the
dictatorship of Marcos Perez Jiménez in 1958. The democratic
formalities could sustain during four decades thanks to the
operation of the wealth of the country and the restoration of
networks friendship between the governing party and the rest of the
population. The promise "to seed petroleum" only served to fatten
the pockets of minority sectors of the nation.

Chávez managed to capitalize those yearnings of change of the
Venezuelan society to its favor, being elect president with a heavy
margin from the electorate who endorsed in him a "check in target"
to remove above from the unfortunate bipartisanism of Accion
Democratica and COPEI. In spite of its military origin and its
leftwing speech, its millionaire electoral campaign was paid for by
local and international capitalist sectors that saw in him, the
opportunity to assure the governability and to continue its
businesses in the territory. They were not mistaken in its
prognoses. After five years of government the chavismo has
declared him a war without quarter to the traditional sectors of the
Venezuelan bourgeoisie - Fedecamaras -, recovering the agendas of
the social movements agglutinated to his around to wear away them
in rounds of shade against the ghosts of the puntofijismo. Next to
this, the mediatic amplification of the most preservative sectors of
the country and its reiterating - and more and more solitary -, called
to the coup d'etat have served the government to distract the
attention of the true problems of the country and to disguise the
millionaire businesses done by the multinational companies in
Venezuela, contracts that, and this have to a separate analysis, has
been viable by the disarticulation of good part of the qualitative
hardened a soldier to fire social movement and quantitatively after
the experience of the "Caracazo".

The true "foreign intervention"
Ample sectors of the Venezuelan and world-wide left have been
represented by the fluid and generous verb of Chávez commander,
verbal his top guy and his repetition of the common places of the
own revolutionary speech of the Cold War. It is pitiful speech
supposedly "critics" in the world have been let enchant by the songs
of siren of the self-appointed "Bolivarian Revolution", whereas in
the reality - small detail anticipated by the Hugo rhetoric Rafael
Chávez has not deepened the relation of Venezuela with the
economics tendencies of the globalization to the Latin American
nation in its paper of safe supplier of energy and resources to the
buyers of the first world, beginning of course with the United
States. While the project of country of the "left-handed person of
Sabaneta" is a question mark, the denominated "Process" needs
ample flows of foreign investment to pay for the millionaire
programs Populists and friendship relation that assures their
permanence in the power. We understand that these words are
impossible to understand for those who have believed without the
fiction of a revolution in Venezuela. We enumerated data,
completely verifiable by the peculiar ones in the subject, of how the
economic Globalization advances to passage of winners in the today
key sectors of the world-wide economy.

Petroleum
Although the state petroleum company appears like "the New
Pdvsa", their deals do not differ substantially from the strategy
assumed by previous administrations, which assured in the best
terms for the masters of the North the hydrocarbon flow. Not even
during the last war of Iraq, when some social sectors of the country
suggested their cease like measurement of protest by the invasion,
the petroleum spurt let provide to the ports with the Uncle Sam.
This way Alí Rodriguez Araque, president of the state petroleum
company, announced that according to numbers confirmed by the
Department of Commerce of the United States in the year 2003
PDVSA were the second world-wide company in positioning of
crude in the U.S.A. This means more than 47 million sold barrels of
crude Venezuelan to the United States, with a value of thousand
333 million dollars. Venezuela is and will be a reliable supplier of
energy for its main buyer. The sentence comes from the own
Chávez which declared 9 of March the past "we do not have nor
picks to damage it - the relation with the USA -, in 5 years we have
been supplying of constant and safe way, every day of those 365
years from petroleum to the United States". The individual of this
declaration is that it takes place 9 days after, presiding over a
"anti-imperialist march" (worthy of Ripley, we repeated) the same
Chávez affirmed the opposite: "Mr. Bush Must know who if it
happens oneself to him madness (...) to invade to Venezuela (...)
knows the town of the United States that lamentably nor a drop of
petroleum will arrive to them from Venezuela". According to the
informed bulletin of the own Pdvsa, "Outstanding personalities of
the Department of Energy and the Agency of Power Information, as
well as of the Corporation for the Private Investment the
International, Exim Bank, World Bank, IFC, International
Monetary Fund, Inter-American Development Bank and advisory
companies of governmental organisms, investors and industrialists
received, with noticeable interest, information of first hand on the
operational, commercial and financial present time of PDVSA, as
well as on their direction of businesses towards the medium term".
The search of foreign investment has shown its fruits. Shell and
Exxon Mobil will participate in the projects of crude operation and
exploration of heavy that are in Petroliferous Faja of the Orinoco
where the greater concentration of resources of the hemisphere
exists, because reserves of 275 billion barrels are considered.
Petroleum of Venezuela and the Italian company ENI (Ente
Nazionale Indrocarburi) subscribed an understanding
memorandum to develop and to operate outposts of extra-heavy
crude gas and technologies processing.

Gas
Minister of Energy and Minas Rafael Ramirez announced that
Venezuela will begin to place natural gas in the American market in
2008, like part of his plans to fortify his image of "reliable power
source". In order to fulfill the objective the present gas production
of 7 billion cubical feet to the day will be increased in 60%. This
way the projects in march by Pdvsa are the following ones: Jose 250
(450 million $), Gas Anaco, Gasoducto of Guajira (255 million $) in
the Colombia-Venezuela Interconnection; ICO (510 million $),
Group Yucal Trio to please (TotalFinalElf, Repsol, Inepetrol,
Otepi), investments considered in 400 million $ and Repsol-Area
Ravines (225 million $). Between the investments opportunities
count, among others, the Project Marshal Sucre. Deltana Platform:
Chevron-Texaco received the concession to make workings of
exploration and gas operation in the third block of the Platform
Deltana, area located in the bordering marine areas with Trinidad
and Tobago with reserves considered in 38 trillions of cubical
natural gas feet. Ramirez informed that the Chevron will initiate in
June of 2004 the perforations with a considered investment of 170
million dollars. The company has three of the five segments of the
Deltana Platform and in its operation Pdvsa will work along with
and the international partnerships British Petroleum, Totalfinalelf
and Statoil, which according to the estimations began to produce
the gas as of the 2009.

Project Gas Anaco: Pdvsa received from the Society General and
ING. Bank an additional loan of 125 million dollars for the
financing of the project Gas Anaco. The same one was contracted
under favorable terms by means of Citibank like bank leader of the
union, amortizable every six months, in a lapse of five years and to
an interest rate of around 1, 72%.

Marshal Sucre: Venezuela will sign an agreement with the
Anglo-Dutch giant Royal Dutch/Shell to develop natural the gas
project liquefied (GNL) Marshal Sucre. Royal Dutch/Shell would
head the development of Marshal Sucre, a project of 2.7 milliards of
dollars that includes perforation outside coast for natural gas
extraction, a liquefied natural gas pipe line and plant in the
Peninsula of Pariah to the east of the country. On the other hand,
Pdvsa, Shell and Mitsubishi, reaffirmed the commitments
subscribed in November of 2002 for this project.

Petrochemical
Pequiven - filial of Pdvsa- and Exxon Mobil they project to
construct a plant of oleo fines altogether - raw material for the
industry of plastic-in the industrial complex of Jose, Anzoátegui
state. According to commentaries of the authorities of the MEM so
project will become the angular stone of the development plan of
the national petrochemical sector, creating 200,000 jobs in a lapse
of between four and five years. The global investment to carry out
the development ascends to 2.65 milliards of dollars and will have
like objective to feed the market of the national and international
plastic, reaching according to the projections annual productions of
1 million tons of ethylene, 780,000 tons of polyethylene’s and
400,000 tons of glycols. In year 2000 the company/signature in the
agreement for the construction of the plant of olefins announced.
The execution chronogram underwent a delay due to the process of
fusion of the oil Americans Exxon and Mobil. In order to initiate
the project it was needed to be able 60% of the resources by interval
of international the banking financing, approximately 1.5 milliards
of dollars. After as much time, according to the valuation of the
economic magazine Venezuelan Quantum (paradoxically of
pro-government tendency), "the concretion of this project could
interpret like the intention of the Ministry of Energy and Mines" to
compensate "to Exxon Mobil, after it to have disqualified like
partner of natural the gas project liquefied Marshal Sucre, and after
this company decided not to actively participate in the licitation of
the areas for the exploration and advantage of natural gas reserves
the existing in the Deltana Platform".

Coal
The 13 of November of the 2003 Hugo Chávez announced the
elevation of the coal production in the state Zulia to 36 million
metric tons, a decision framed in the call project "America Port", a
work valued in 60 million dollars nailed in the Island of San
Bernardo, big port key by their strategic proximity to the
Southeastern of the United States. The production of the mineral
has as destiny to the multinational companies of the Anglo coal
American, RAG Coal, Take, Excel and Anti-American Coal. The
announcement makes deaf ears of the repeated denunciations on
the contamination, the ecological devastation and the presence of
diseases product of the carboniferous industry of the region.

Telecommunications
According to preliminary estimations of Product Intern Brute (PIB)
presented/displayed by the Central bank of Venezuela, the sector of
the Telecommunications registered to the 2003 closing a growth of
the 1.9%, locating to the sector in the greater rank of positive
variations with respect to the rest of the activities. The activity
communications as opposed to demonstrated a fast recovery the
difficulties presented/displayed at the beginning of the 2003; in the
last registering quarterly of the year a growth of 4.6% with relation
to the same period of 2002. It will be necessary to remember that
the main companies of the sector are multinational like Telcel
Bellsouth?

External debt
In spite of being one of the electoral promises of the Chávez
candidate, president Chávez has been like precise a payer front the
commitments contracted by the country with the multilateral
organisms of financing. In a granted interview to Marta Harnecker
in August of the 2002, it declared that "I do not believe that a
revolutionary process must, necessarily, to be it, to not know
subjects commitments like the one of the external debt; or assumed
others with institutions, corporations or countries of the world." In
that same conversation, Chávez suffers of one interested amnesia:
"" we never said in the electoral campaign that we were not going to
pay the debt. There was the rumor, commentaries of press, et
cetera. Yes we said that we would propose a scheme to reconstruct
the external debt and in that it has not been possible to
advance”

Water
With only 40 legislators of the 165 of the National Assembly (43
less del quorum of half plus one necessary one), of as 36 they were
chapistas (although you do not create it), in two hours were
approved 87 articles of the Statutory law of the Public Property
Estate in the second fortnight of March del 2004. Article 6 of this
Law attributes to the States two categories of goods: those of the
public dominion that "son inalienable and imprescriptibly" and they
cannot be sold, yielded nor acquired by prescription, and those of
the deprived dominion, that yes can be sold or be alienated. The
waters happen to the private dominion. It adds this article that the
no alienable goods of the public dominion "Can to acquire the
condition of alienable properties by means of sanctioned to request
of the governor, by Agreement of the Legislative Council with the
favorable vote of the two third parts of their members. In the file the
opinion of the Solicitor of the state and the Contralor of the Estate"
must consist;. With this regulation, as an intellectual related to the
Process declared Luis Britto Garcia, "Forty legislators of few
Legislative Advice could raise their hands so that they were saleable
the Lake of Maracaibo, the Lagoon of Valencia, Apure, the
Caroní, the Orinoco, the Delta and in general the hydroelectric
power plants of Guayana and of the country. They would not lack
forty buyers".

Transgenic
In October of the 2003 the Law of Biological Similes and Inhumes
for the Reproduction was promulgated on the part of the National
Assembly Animal. For the environmentalist organizations, as the
case of MOVES and its spokesman Leobardo Acurero, "it is not
another thing that the legal seal that will allow the entrance to
Venezuela of the dangerous transgenic seeds. At heart one is the
most novel and terrible form of colonization to consolidate the
agro-alimentary dependency like mission of the mercantilist
globalize that gigantic North American companies like
MONSANTO and CARGIL are promoting ". Acurero has made a
detailed study of the referred Law, which can be asked for to the
email xx move heads an initiative to reject the measurement: "a law
of seeds like which it approved the Assembly National that it allows
the transgenic in Venezuela, opposite to the National interest is
expressed in the Constitution with sustainable agriculture, therefore
the next step that we must give as Venezuelan is to oppose by
unconstitutional this law antilife, before the Constitutional Room of
the Supreme Court of Justice TSJ".

Mining
Propped up by the Ministry of the Atmosphere a proposal of
territorial ordering has taken shape and standard of the area of
Imataca, that as we will remember, lodges to more than 3 million
forests and is inhabited by 26,000 inhabitants of 7 indigenous ethnic
groups in the Southeastern of the country. The same one would
destine a forest use of 61.5% of the territory and a mining use of
12%. In march are the projects Nickel Hill (530 million dollars), of
exploration in Small cuttlefish 10 in the Callao (70 million dollars)
and the Camorra Venezuelan Hecla (50 million dollars). The
projects in promotion are: Miner of Block B, State Bolivar (600
million dollars), Plant Friable Quartzite (211 million dollars) and
plants iron and steel by 1,172 million dollars.
==============================
* EL LIBERTARIO newspaper from the Anarchist Relationships
Commision of Venezuela


*******
********
****** The A-Infos News Service ******
News about and of interest to anarchists
******
INFO: http://ainfos.ca/org http://ainfos.ca/org/faq.html
HELP: [email protected]
SUBSCRIPTION: send mail to [email protected] with command in
body of mail "subscribe (or unsubscribe) listname [email protected]".

Options for all lists at http://www.ainfos.ca/options.html

[Morpheus]

NEITHER DICTATORSHIP NOR REVOLUTION
by Domingo Alberto Rangel

If you hear to people of the party Primero Justicia, they will get to
think that Venezuela lives under a cruel dictatorship. The same
sensation will feel if it stops to listen the merchants of the party
Proyecto Venezuela. More discreet, the copeyanos speak of the
abuses of the Government. And still more discreet, the adecos
reproach to the government of Chávez their Advantage or its
excesses. In front of this picture of reactions so varied between the
opponents, anyone it would have right to ask itself if the
government of Chávez is or it is not a dictatorship, or if bullshit is
hardly arbitrary to the way of those that take advantage of their
advantages to perpetrate some abuse.

This government of Hugo Chávez is loafer or funny, but he is not
dictatorial. It has the barracks abuses that are characteristic in the
Latin American military. But it is not and it will be never a
dictatorship. The leaders of Primero Justicia, most similar to those
gentlemen that call the French "vert gallant", would have to ask to
him Pompeyo Marquez, now near them, what thing is a
dictatorship. Then Pompeyo Marquez would say to them that a
dictatorship is a regime without habeas corpus, without shelter
resources, without Parliament for the investigations nor presses for
the denunciations and where the political prisoners spend years
whole, in interminable succession, without nobody can visit them
at least to alleviate to them to the average nights of solitude or the
half days of sadness. That is a small dictatorship. Who says that in
the Venezuela of today the dictatorship reigns or is mentally ill a
mental one or does not know to catalogue the political regimes.

They want to know the dictatorship?
In order to illustrate to the dandies of the Coordinadora
Democratica I will say to them that in a dictatorship, like which I
fought and suffered now and speak in first person because moral
authority exceeds to me, the jails count me per years. I fell
imprisoned in April of 1950, one night thick illuminated only by the
lightning of the Catatumbo, and left in January of 1954.
Throughout the year of 1951 I was undergoing a regime of solitary
confinement in a bend of the Prison of San Juan de los Morros, that
the common prisoners called the "Sing-Sing". Then I was put
under in military opinion, but never I saw the judge of the process
nor had defender or prosecutor. All that happened under the
government of two I illustrate the military: Thin Carlos Chalbaud
and Marcos Perez Jiménez.

Years later, between 1963 and 1966, I returned to the jail and I did
not have judgment either, I never saw the judge of the cause, if it is
that this one existed, and I had patience to support that republican
farce. I must say that in my two long prisons, altogether near eight
years, I did not receive the solidarity of a single newspaper, was no
journalist that goes to visit to me or sent a slip of paper of
consolation or breath to me and what he is more serious, between
great existing newspapers at those times, no demonstrated to the
smaller affection or charity towards those who we could in the jails.

It is that when there is a dictatorship, all, except a handful, know to
put their horse armor in soaking. Chávez and his is idiot, but not
mercenary. Here mask of disguised clowns, merchants of the
leaders.

The chavista revolution
The Bolivarian revolution is a complete swindle. We could say that
in the Venezuela of today there is no a dictatorship, but less, much
less, there is a revolution. A revolution does not take the name of
no leader because a revolution is something innovating like
anything. And less of leader as preservative as it was Simón
Bolivar. Bolivarian revolution is a contradiction in its own terms, is
like speaking of the hot ice or the frozen fire. The revolutions take
control of highest doses of violence because they are ruptures of the
social order, insurgencies of the dark mass that, armed and solved,
devastates yet. A revolution is violent or it is not revolution.

To speak of pacific revolution is already to confess one funny, to
surround a contraband bad lucking with an honorable pavilion. It is
to be a dork. I am not making Gallic of dogmatism or sectarianism.
Hardly elementary concepts of political science. From Hugo
Grocio, in the dawn of the Modern Age, a process of social
rebellion, of armed insurgency is understood by revolution in which
the mass demotes to the dominant classes, it snatches his
properties, it dissolves the military apparatus to them and it restores
a new social ordering. These concepts are not exclusive of Marx,
Lenin, Mao or Fidel Castro. You consult the thought of Oliverio
Cromwell or Maximiliano Robespierre, bourgeois personages both,
creators of insurgencies that they looked for to establish the
capitalist regime and they will see that in anything they differ of
whatever I am maintaining. To speak of pacific revolution since
Chávez and its acolytes do, is a tacit confession of fiendish trick
and is something worse, to take to the others by stupid idiot.

Not even anti-imperialist
This regime not even is anti-imperialist. The newspaper El
Libertario, the only thing that survives in the UCV with brave and
the horizontal of other times because the others are all rotten one,
publishes the list of Yankee, English, French, Spanish and Brazilian
the companies oil that have received here concessions able to be
shine al very same Juan Vicente Gomez.

Nobody, from the death of the meritorious one, has been so
conditional and generous, so prodigal and so friendly with oil
imperialism like Hugo Chávez. But Chávez is so vivacious that,
after pleasing to trust North American until astonishing to the same
father of George W. Bush, it releases an anti-imperialist speech.
Chávez is a devout one that pronounces an atheistic speech in the
doors of a cathedral, a alien that speech of human rights, a
smuggler with a decorated affluent flag.

Here there is not dictatorship, as they maintain the stupidity of the
Primero Justicia party, but is no revolution either. We have a
regime demagogue and means nasty, are everything.
==============================
* EL LIBERTARIO newspaper from the Anarchist Relationships
Commision from Venezuela


*******
********
****** The A-Infos News Service ******
News about and of interest to anarchists
******
INFO: http://ainfos.ca/org http://ainfos.ca/org/faq.html
HELP: [email protected]
SUBSCRIPTION: send mail to [email protected] with command in
body of mail "subscribe (or unsubscribe) listname [email protected]".

Options for all lists at http://www.ainfos.ca/options.html

[Louis Pio]

While I agree with the criticisms (the ones I could manage to read) I don't see how it should justify taking a secterian approach to the mass movement of workers and poor in Venezuela, as it seems the other camp here is doing.
As I have stated a thousand times this is a process which can go either one way or another, and the active participation of the masses in this is exactly the key. If ones expect a socialmovement and especially it's first leadership (with many reformist types) to be "pure" one will wait an extremely long time (forever probably).

A good article on what is essential in the approach we should take towards what is happening can be found here Why Marxists are fighting for a “No” next Sunday (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/august_15_approaches.html)

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

How can you not support a progressive like Chavez? It's all fine and dandy waiting for the revolution but you have to face the reality here which is that the people of Venezuala, the working classes of Venezuala are in charge in Venezuala a hell of a lot more than most of the world's working classes.

That is worth celebrating.

[RedAnarchist]

Chavez is a good leader for Venezuela, but he isnt as left-wing as he could be, or as left-wing as i and many others would like.

[YKTMX]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 09:46 PM
How can you not support a progressive like Chavez? It's all fine and dandy waiting for the revolution but you have to face the reality here which is that the people of Venezuala, the working classes of Venezuala are in charge in Venezuala a hell of a lot more than most of the world's working classes.

That is worth celebrating.
It's not the fact that you're wrong here that's interesting is that's you're wrong about the right thing.

The problem is that the Venezualan working class are not anymore in control than western workers. They are at the mercy of a "politician", just like the western workers.

[Edward Norton]

It's not the fact that you're wrong here that's interesting is that's you're wrong about the right thing.

The problem is that the Venezualan working class are not anymore in control than western workers. They are at the mercy of a "politician", just like the western workers.

I agree with you that Chavez is not a communist or a revolutionary socialist.

You say that the working class is captive to Chavez like the working class is elsewhere to other left-populist politicians, fair enough.

However, don't you support the 'Respect party', although I know you are from Scotland, you have mentioned support for them on previous posts.

Well the 'Respect party' is far MORE reformist in its economic and political policies than the Chavez government has been.

*Respect have NOT called for the abolition of either the monarchy or the house of lords, nor the removal of the status of the aristocracy that Britain still somehow has in the 21st century.

*Respect only call for the preservation of the NHS and education in state owned hands and have stated that ONLY the rail network would be re-nationalised. Respect have NOT called for the re-nationalisation of the banks, insurance firms, pension firms, gas/electric/water firms or any major corporation.

*Respect have not put any viable and long lasting policies for the defence of peoples liberties and dealing with police corruption and abuse.

*Respect do NOT want their MPs,MEPs and MSPs (should the ever have them) to live on the average wage of a worker and are content to see Respect politicians ending up being as remote and overpaid as the rotten political establishment that we now have.

Chavez, like I said is no angel and certainly no revolutionary, his only use has been to re-awaken the minds of Venezuela's poor majority and to provide the type of political tension and class polarisation that is needed for the development and carrying out of a real proletarian revolution.

Respect at best will end up like the German 'Greens'. Start of saying they are different and will make changes, but as soon as they get elected, will be as useless as the rest of the political establishment.

Your point of the working class being at the mercy of a 'politician' is true, but by supporting Respect you demolish your arguement, what Venezuelans should fuck their politicians and make revolution but the people in Britain should put themselves at the mercy of the likes of George Galloway, who is also NOT A SOCIALIST. He has even admitted this himself in many interviews. He simply labels himself a 'progressive', but then so does Blair, its a shallow statement deviod of any real meaning. But then again Galloway is reflecting the populist, opportunist and reformist nature of Respect.

[Guerrilla22]

This is a true victory for democracy and the working class of Venezuela as well as Latin America as a whole.

[PRC-UTE]

It's nice to see the ruling class squirm - they really hate Chavez.

We shouldn't be fooled into thinking this anything nearing a revolution but it is class struggle.

[refuse_resist]

This is very good news for the working class and poor of Venezeula.

Viva Chavez :D

[The Feral Underclass]

All I keep seeing here are people saying "we must face the reality," "we cannot be sectarian," "we must support him because he's progressive."

Bullshit! The reality is that working class people all over the world, including Venezuela are oppressed by capitalism and the state. The reality is, that supporting Chavez's progessivism will only make capitalism look sweeter. It will not end wage slavery or oppression. sectarianism! Surely it is opposing the very thing we should be opposing. So Chavez claims he is a Marxist, or does he? He says he wants to stand up to Amerian imperialism! So what, there are many leaders in the world who want to stand up to American imperialism. Jaque Chirac being one of them. This is not a reason to support him.

The "reality" is that Chavez is a crook, just like all the rest of them and should be opposed as such.

FUCK CHAVEZ!

[Scottish_Militant]

Who's standing up for capitalism??

And no one claimed Chavez was a Marxist, Chavez himself has said this.

What would you do if you lived in Venezuela rightnow then?

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

Is Hugo Chavez a communist or at least socialist?

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 07:06 AM
Who's standing up for capitalism??
I don't know what you mean?


What would you do if you lived in Venezuela rightnow then?

The answer you know I will give will only be shot down by people claiming to be "realists" blah blah blah. If I was a Venezuelan working person who knows what I would do. I would probably support Chavez. If I was me, then I would try and activly oppose him on an anarchist ticket.

[socialistfuture]

if i were in venezuela i would support him untill he started to stall the revolutionary process. and my support would end if he became authoritarian - stopping strikes by force etc.

viva la revolucion!!!

[Louis Pio]

If I was me, then I would try and activly oppose him on an anarchist ticket.

This basically mean siding with the opposition nomatter how "independent" your platform would be. The vote was either yes or no. Not "viva la anarchia total blah blah" vs Chavez.
The whole point in this is that one need to be involved in the movement, we don't accomplish anything by making demands from the sidelines nor would anybody listen.
Constructive criticism pointing a way forward is the way to go, putting yourself in opposition to the workers and poor in Venezuela are not.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 11:05 AM
This basically mean siding with the opposition nomatter how "independent" your platform would be.
So anyone who doesnt support Chavez has sided with the opposition?


The vote was either yes or no. Not "viva la anarchia total blah blah" vs Chavez.

I'm not interested in what the vote was. It was important for radical left wing groups to oppose the election and call for direct action against all state forms.


The whole point in this is that one need to be involved in the movement, we don't accomplish anything by making demands from the sidelines nor would anybody listen.

It depends what your trying to achieve. If it is a revolution you are trying to achieve all you need worry about is propogating your ideas and organising among the workers. Fuck bourgeois election politics and all the intrigue that comes with it.


Constructive criticism pointing a way forward is the way to go,

What kind of reformist bullshit is that! Fuck constructive criticism, we want to smash the state and capitalism and create a communist society. Simply giving Chavez "constructive criticism" is the same as giving George Bush or Tony Blair "constructive criticism. It will amount to nothing.


putting yourself in opposition to the workers and poor in Venezuela are not.

Why is opposing Chavez in opposition to the workers and the poor. Are you trying to argue that Chavez is what the workers and poor actually need? Or are you another one of these "jump on the bandwagon" Marxists who think we should support every person who shows any glimour, no matter how small, of maxist leanings.

The objectives should be clear and working class movements should focus on them no matter how pleasent people like Chavez look. Our objective is to smash these people, their institutions and their politics and we shouldn't forget that.

[h&s]

Though I would have voted in favour of Chavez in the referendum, I do have serious doubts about him. When he made his speach celebrating the victory he said 'long live the bolivarian constitution.' That constitution is better than anything he oppostion have come up with, but its not good enough.

Article 3: The essential purposes of the State are the protection and development of the individual and respect for the dignity of the individual,
That sounds too much like a capitalist thing to me (not that I'm against individual rights, but thats all capitalists ever go on about).
I would have no problem if this was only a temporary constution, but he implied that it would be permanent.
Read the rest of it here: (http://www.embavenez-us.org/constitution/intro.htm)

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

Will he work as a true socialist in Venezuela? How is he going to make it work? How is he going to help the peasants?

[Kez]

TAT you secterian ****, get the fuck off your high horse and research whats happening in Venezuela and what is being said here.

keep your crude slogans for the next time you try claiming squatters rights, not somewhere where its important to have a serious discussion.

Why should we givev Chavez critical support?
Because he has put through many good reforms

Should we have him as the ideal?
No, he is no marxist. While he is radicalising the workers, he is craeting the ideal situation for us as marxists (as CMI is doing right now, unlike all other secterian groups who arent even in Venezuela) to agitate among the workers. This is where u go to a Venezuelan worker and say

"Yes, what Chavez has done is good, but we need to go further in order to secure the gains, eg nationalise everything, workers control"

Dont forget, even the supporters with Chavez arent all unified, some want moderate reforms, some want to go very far, our job is to spread marxism among the Venezuelan masses, and from this point the masses will either push Chavez to marxism, or they will get rid of him and put in place a marxist candidate.

"Fuck bourgeois election politics and all the intrigue that comes with it."
-Grow up, as a revolutionary u use whatever you can to spread marxism. Anarchists have mostly "fucked bourgeoise election politics" where the fuck are you now?

TAT, many of the goals you want are shared by us, but for fucks sake dont close your ears and start spouting fuckin slogans left right and centre, try asking what should be done then discussin.

[Louis Pio]

So anyone who doesnt support Chavez has sided with the opposition?

In a society so polarised as Venezuela, yes. Or let me refrase it, he who do not support the bolivarian movement is.


I'm not interested in what the vote was. It was important for radical left wing groups to oppose the election and call for direct action against all state forms.

Well first off nobody would listen, secondly if they did it would mean the return of Carmona and his lot. Taking away all the social reforms, imprisoning activists etc.
Maybe that position is nice to take in the safety of your own 4 walls. It is however not a serious position.


It depends what your trying to achieve. If it is a revolution you are trying to achieve all you need worry about is propogating your ideas and organising among the workers. Fuck bourgeois election politics and all the intrigue that comes with it.

Tactics is always 2 sided, and as I explained above this referendum was extremely important. That's also why 90% of the Venezuelans voted, something we hardly see.


What kind of reformist bullshit is that! Fuck constructive criticism, we want to smash the state and capitalism and create a communist society. Simply giving Chavez "constructive criticism" is the same as giving George Bush or Tony Blair "constructive criticism. It will amount to nothing.

So your position is that of standing at the sidelines screaming? How should that ever amount to anything? Workers activist, rank and file workers, poor etc all look to Chavez. And our articles are widely read in Venezuela, when we say what we think is the way forward people listen. That can actually archive something.


Why is opposing Chavez in opposition to the workers and the poor. Are you trying to argue that Chavez is what the workers and poor actually need? Or are you another one of these "jump on the bandwagon" Marxists who think we should support every person who shows any glimour, no matter how small, of maxist leanings.

What im saying is that we support the bolivarian movement. People still look to Chavez, they are however more and more against alot of the reformist elements in government. At this point it would be extremely foolish to use alot of time denouncing Chavez, it's more constructive fighting to get these demands through
*Arm the people in militias
*nationalise the economy under workers control, starting with the big companies like PDVSA
*unify all the revolutionary organisations like tradeunions, bolivarian circles etc.

All this are steps neccessary for a succesfull revolution.
Which can be carried through with or without Chavez, as a saying in Venezuela go.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

TAT what the fuck are you talking about? Fuck Chavez? When I say face reality I mean that for real Venezualans this is a victory, I'm sure your rhetoric there is all very noble and all but that is just idealism.

Capitalism will not be strenghtend by Chavez, he is leftist populist etc. but progressive, progressive means he is venturing away from the current system which lo and behold just happens to be capitalism.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 17 2004, 04:50 AM
Surely it is opposing the very thing we should be opposing. So Chavez claims he is a Marxist, or does he? He says he wants to stand up to Amerian imperialism! So what, there are many leaders in the world who want to stand up to American imperialism. Jaque Chirac being one of them. This is not a reason to support him.

The "reality" is that Chavez is a crook, just like all the rest of them and should be opposed as such.

FUCK CHAVEZ!

Do you know anything about Chavez? The first indigenous leader of the Venezualian people? I doubt it, only somebody who has no idea about the man would compare him to Chirac.

[redstar2000]

Workers activist, rank and file workers, poor etc all look to Chavez.

Yeah, they probably do.

That's a shame...because they're almost certain to be bitterly disappointed.

Who, I wonder, will they "look to" then?

To a Trotskyist party that "critically supported" Chavez?

People should keep in mind the fact that the Venezuelan Trotskyists are actually doing precisely what Lenin and Trotsky told them to do...support left-bourgeois reformism as long as it's popular -- then, present themselves as the "revolutionary" alternative when reformism fails to improve the conditions of the masses.

Remember the goal -- it's not power for the working class, it's power for the "vanguard party"...in this case a Trotskyist party. Their strategy is designed to put themselves into power, and it "makes sense" in their terms.

Should the propitious moment arrive, they will present themselves as the "real" bolivarians and denounce Chavez as "a fake".

Will that moment arrive? Probably not...although life is "full of surprises".

One thing can be safely predicted: if the Venezuelan Trotskyists ever do "seize power", they will then...act like Stalinists.

It's "hard-wired" into the paradigm.

:redstar2000:

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

[The Feral Underclass]

Teis, thanks for your post. What you are saying makes sense, and there isnt really very much I can say to break down your argument.

The unfortunate thing is that the workers do support Chavez so you are right in saying that by denouncing him any organisation would become marginalised.

But I have no illusions. Chavez will fuck them over, just like they all do. Putting your hopes in someone like him will only leave you disheartened in the end. It will come to nothing.

[Louis Pio]

To TAT: I put my hopes in the working class not Chavez.
But however I don't think I can dismiss Chavez just yet.
Anyway thanks for the debate.

To: Redstar what a bunch of mindless blabber you cooked up, I would suggest you to know more on the situation before you answer anything.
As I said we have repeatedly put forward our position plus we are working to unite all the revolutionary organisations to be able to take the process further. Our goal is nothing more than uniting them and build a new form of society, workers control of industry, direct participation of the workers etc. For that one needs a democratic centralist party, a term you have your own definition of I guess, it however don't corresponds to how we put it into practice.

"Act like stalinists" :rolleyes: Oh my... Whatever son, and meanwhile you will continue as the great internetguru I reckon? How nice and cosy that most be...

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

I'm sorry Redstar but wtf are you talking about here?

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 04:38 PM
TAT what the fuck are you talking about? Fuck Chavez?
[Fancy that, an anarchist who's against a politician and statesman] Yes Fuck Chavez and all the people like him.


When I say face reality I mean that for real Venezualans this is a victory,

Is it?


I'm sure your rhetoric there is all very noble and all but that is just idealism.

Don't be so patronising! There are objectives we must not forget. It seems to me that some people jump on the bandwagon simply because someone shows marginal signs of being [ever so slightly] radical. Let's wait and see shall we.


Capitalism will not be strenghtend by Chavez, he is leftist populist etc. but progressive, progressive means he is venturing away from the current system which lo and behold just happens to be capitalism.

Only fools and ambitionists put their faith in politicians. As your not Venezulan or anything to do with his ruling party I can only assume your the former.


The first indigenous leader of the Venezualian people?

What does that have to do with anything?


only somebody who has no idea about the man would compare him to Chirac.

Touch a nerve did I soldier!? Please show me where I compare Chavez to Chirac?

[Leninist thug]

Revolution yes, elections no!

[Louis Pio]

Revolution yes, elections no!

In this case it would have meant no chance for a revolution anytime soon. It was a yes or no vote. Abstention would just strenghten reaction.
Btw old Lenin was not categorically against participating in elections, parliament can provide a good platform for agitation, just remember to keep your mp's in check.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 17 2004, 04:50 AM
All I keep seeing here are people saying "we must face the reality," "we cannot be sectarian," "we must support him because he's progressive."

Bullshit! The reality is that working class people all over the world, including Venezuela are oppressed by capitalism and the state. The reality is, that supporting Chavez's progessivism will only make capitalism look sweeter. It will not end wage slavery or oppression. sectarianism! Surely it is opposing the very thing we should be opposing. So Chavez claims he is a Marxist, or does he? He says he wants to stand up to Amerian imperialism! So what, there are many leaders in the world who want to stand up to American imperialism. Jaque Chirac being one of them. This is not a reason to support him.

The "reality" is that Chavez is a crook, just like all the rest of them and should be opposed as such.

FUCK CHAVEZ!


Forgetting what you posted these days TAT?

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

[Fancy that, an anarchist who's against a politician and statesman] Yes Fuck Chavez and all the people like him.

You ever hear of the concept of the lesser of two evils? That is Chavez, that is why I do not want to hear leftists saying Fuck Chavez, because Chavez is a leftist, a populaist but a man of the people nonetheless.



Is it?

Whats with the rhetorical question? Of course it is, why else would I have said it?


Don't be so patronising! There are objectives we must not forget. It seems to me that some people jump on the bandwagon simply because someone shows marginal signs of being [ever so slightly] radical. Let's wait and see shall we.

I've been following Chavez ever since my first days as a socialist party member and Chavez has yet to fail the people of Venezuala, sitting around waiting for him to fuck up is pointless, waiting for an anarchist revolution to come around is pointless in situations like Venezuala where the forces of counter-revolution are so strong. Sometimes you have to wait.



Only fools and ambitionists put their faith in politicians. As your not Venezulan or anything to do with his ruling party I can only assume your the former.

I'm sorry but aren't most idealist considered fools?

[redstar2000]

To Redstar: what a bunch of mindless blabber you cooked up...

Oh, did I blow your "cover"?

Gosh, I'm really sorry about that.


Our goal is nothing more than uniting them and build a new form of society, workers control of industry, direct participation of the workers etc. For that one needs a democratic centralist party...

...who will "run the show" after the "revolution"!

Why be "shy" about that here? If you can't tell the truth about your ambitions to the Venezuelans, you can certainly tell the truth on this board.


...and meanwhile you will continue as the great internetguru I reckon? How nice and cosy that must be...

It has its compensations...for one thing, I never have to lie to people.


I'm sorry Redstar but wtf are you talking about here?

About the real goal of Venezuelan Trotskyist "support" of Chavez, of course. People in this thread are criticizing the Trotskyists for the wrong reasons.

Yes, they are wallowing in the muck of left-bourgeois reformism...but not because they are left-bourgeois reformists themselves. It's part of their strategy to "win the confidence" of the masses.

As I said, should the opportunity arise, they intend to present themselves as "the real bolivarians" while denouncing Chavez as a "fake"...inviting the Venezuelan masses to put them in power.

At which time, they will, indeed, "act like Stalinists".

You have to look at this stuff historically. When Leninists are out of power, they try to imitate Lenin in the years prior to the October 1917 coup. If and when they get into power, then (and only then!) is it time to "act like Stalin"...or, for that matter, like Trotsky when he was part of the power elite.

Does the Trotskyist strategy in Venezuela act to advance the class struggle? Oddly enough, it almost certainly does...at least for the time being. I think they are completely sincere in their attempts to "radicalize" the bolivarian circles, etc. At some point, they may even raise the demand "All Power to the Bolivarian Circles" or something along those lines...and they'll "mean it".

But what they really want is to be "leaders" of those circles, "delegates" to bigger assemblies of those circles, and, ultimately, the guys "in charge" of a "revolutionary government". They want Chavez's job...and all that goes with that.

In the unlikely event that such a sequence of developments transpires as to put them in those positions...look out!

(Note that Chavez himself is making noises about "reconciliation" with his conservative opposition...so the most likely outcome is a "deal" and the gradual cooling off of ferment among the masses. The Venezuelan Trotskyists will probably never get their "chance" to run things.)

Now, is there anything different that revolutionaries in Venezuela "might have done" to promote a more radical outcome?

Probably not...the great majority of the Venezuelan masses are, as you might expect, quite backward in their general outlook. Venezuela is not an advanced capitalist country...though parts of it are well-developed. It quite resembles, when you stop and think about it, Russia c.1900. As long as people are still in the stage where they seek a "redeemer", then any kind of self-emancipation is simply beyond their horizons. They can overthrow a despot...but only to replace him with a new "revolutionary" despot.

There are a few Venezuelan anarchists, by the way, who are telling the truth to the masses about "redeemers" and the need to liberate themselves. Unfortunately, their impact is -- as far as I can tell -- quite marginal.

Material reality is "a harsh mistress".


You ever hear of the concept of the lesser of two evils?

Yep. Myself, I'd rather choose a "good".

:redstar2000:

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

[Palmares]

I will agree that the concept of "the better of two evils" is ludacrious (look at the US and the psuh for the left to support Kerry... :rolleyes: ), however who is to say that Chavez is necessarily 'evil'? He is no marxist or whatever, but I believe he does give a credible opposition to capitalism.

Will he fuck the workers trust? It's very possible. So be wary.

The point he I think is not to 'support' he, but prefer him. In a closed vote voting for him would appear the only option, but when one can, one should always try to push further left.

So don't say "Viva Chavez".

When the people are truly free (e.g. Anarchist society =D ), say "Viva Venezuela!" (or whatever relevant country).

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 11:39 PM
Forgetting what you posted these days TAT?
That isn't a comparison. I am making the point that simply because someone opposes American imperialism does not mean who should support them.


I'm sorry but aren't most idealist considered fools?

Probably. It is a common train of thought among the bourgeoisie to condescend anyone who has an ideal picture of a better society by labelling them foolish. I would expect nothing less.

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by The wise old [email protected] 17 2004, 05:16 AM
Is Hugo Chavez a communist or at least socialist?
No. He is a military officer who got sick of how corrupt Venezualan society is and tried to change it. He first tried to come to power in a coup, but that failed so later he came to power by elections. He's managed to dupe a lot of workers into supporting him by offering some minor reforms to capitalism, but he's not going to get rid of it. Chavez's land reform law was originally proposed for latin America by John Kennedy in the 1960s as part of his "alliance for progress." Chavez has cooperated with lots of multinational corporations, giving them sweet deals, and largely gone along with the IMF & associated crap. The reason the US government doesn't like him is because his foreign policy is too independant. He's negotiated with Cuba, called George Bush an asshole and refused to follow the US's line on many issues. The reason Venezuala's white oligarchy doesn't like him is because he's anti-corruption and because he's not white. Those who think this is a workers' movement are deluding themselves. It is a conflict between military officers and rich people in which workers are pawns.

[Kez]

Its funny to see those on the sidelines make lie after lie about what we say and our intentions just to justify their insignificant pathetic situations.

Look, as a result of Chavez, Venezuelan society is now more polarised than ever, as a result the masses which are pushing for change are going to listen to the marxist literature which is being spread in the form of newspapers etc (this is the paper of our group there http://venezuela.elmilitante.org/ ). More and more workers are

a)being won over to marxism in these conditions
b)more and more people are becoming marxist activists in these conditions

Now, what are we doing?

Obviously we are not simply blindly supporting Chavez. A common slogan among the workers and poor is "with or without Chavez", so hopefully that will answer theanarchists up who keep stating that the workers are going to be duped etc etc. Had these people read on what is going on in Venezuela, they would realise the movement is much more powerful than Chavez.

Chavez's power comes from the people, and he is therefore dependant on the masses. Therefore if you radicalise the masses further, and they demand marxist change, then add this to "with or without Chavez" then Chavez must either commit to these marxist demands, or get lost and a new marxist leader emerges as the will of the people.

So as you can see my dear friends, our job is not to say Chavez is the way, nope, this has never been stated.

Our aim is to continue our work (or start in the case of the secterians) within the mass movement in Venezuela, be it in the community, be it on the farms, be it in the oil fields or factories. We must educate and get the workers to push towards marxism.

We must say what Chavez has done here at X is good, but without Y he is doomed to failure (this is something weve stated many a time.

I suggest my comrades start reading up on the situation before they hurl their slogans.

As for wanting to be the leadership, well i'd rather be part of the leadership (at the position where there is an immediate right to recall) than stay at my computer and start whinging with no power to do anything.

Any mre questions, please ask

[Louis Pio]

Redstar when did you choose to become Don Quixote? Chaseing windmills because you see them as something else?

Now Kez said it very well, in my oppinion the fact that Redstar suffers from paranoia is not my our problem. It is however quite amusing. People discussing from what they imagine instead of from the conditions and what actually happens are not very serious.


or get lost and a new marxist leader emerges as the will of the people.

Leaders I would say, not in the sense of dictators put because they have ben the only ones pointing a way forward while most of the international left was to busy picking their own bellybuttons.

[Scottish_Militant]

I'd like Redstar to explain clearly exactly where he believes that the demand for workers militias and workers control of factories and key sectors of the economy - will mysteriously (as if by magic) hand power over to tiny clique of evil trot dictators who will run the country in a stalinesque manner.

I'd also like him to show us where all these "lies" are in our articles, when he says "lies" I think he actually just means that we've not been foaming at the mouth shouting "FUCK CHAVEZ" and other slogans helpfull to the bolivarian revolution.

[Edelweiss]

A Venezuelan anarchist viewpoint on Chavez (http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/08/296210.html)

[Daymare17]

To TAT, the anarchists and everyone else who calls for Chavez' overthrow:

Is it currently in your power to replace Chavez with something better?

No? Well then, shut the fuck up. Unless you yourself are in a position to take the power, calling for the overthrow (or sodomizing, in the case of TAT...) of Chavez can only help the reaction. Everyone who doesn't see this is a blind **** and a fucking counterrevolutionary. Until socialism has a majority, it's the duty of every socialist to fight the reaction, and fight for a majority.

[redstar2000]

I'd like Redstar to explain clearly exactly where he believes that the demand for workers militias and workers control of factories and key sectors of the economy - will mysteriously (as if by magic) hand power over to tiny clique of evil trot dictators who will run the country in a stalinesque manner.

There's nothing "magical" about the process...we saw Lenin & Company actually do precisely that. I don't have to remind you of the details; you've memorized them.

You need a reliable cadre, of course, probably in the range of 50,000-100,000 members in a country the size of Venezuela...and we know you don't have that now.

But, should the class struggle "heat up", you can hope to gain that cadre fairly quickly...perhaps in six to nine months, perhaps less. During the summer and fall of 1917, the Bolshevik party membership exploded in numbers.

Once you have that -- people who are willing to be bound by party discipline and carry out the orders of their leaders -- the rest is pretty straight-forward. You "pack" popular meetings and assemblies, put forward "ultra-left" resolutions and proposals (that you have no intention of implementing after the revolution), get yourselves elected to leading positions in those assemblies, arm your cadre if they are not already armed, and...seize state power "in the name" of those assemblies.

Then, to "defend the revolution" from its enemies, you repudiate all that "ultra-left" crap, suppress your enemies on the left, and proceed to "administer" the "dictatorship of the proletariat".

Pretty simple, really...though making it work is fraught with difficulties.

One thing you evidently lack thus far is a "great leader"...a charismatic figure like Lenin or Trotsky. (You could try to hire Bob Avakian, but I don't think he speaks Spanish. :lol:)

Perhaps the current party leader could be persuaded to take "charisma lessons"...but he may have to withdraw to the background in favor of a secondary party leader who has "the common touch".

Meanwhile, it seems to me that thus far you are indeed doing what Lenin and Trotsky told you to do...and doing it as well as or even better than could be expected.

Your future depends, however, on the persisting intransigence of Chavez's reactionary opposition. If the "business community" decides that it's "time to make a deal"...then the purely ideological reactionaries will shrink to a small minority and the "struggle" will be "over" (unless the U.S. invades, of course).

Chavez will have become "the FDR" of Venezuela. There will be a flurry of additional populist reforms and then things will gradually "cool down".

The biggest problem you will then face is whether or not to take government jobs. If you decide to do it -- and most Leninist parties yield to the temptation -- then you will become reformist and corrupt.


I'd also like him to show us where all these "lies" are in our articles; when he says "lies" I think he actually just means that we've not been foaming at the mouth shouting "FUCK CHAVEZ" and other slogans helpful to the bolivarian revolution.

There's only one lie...and it's a lie of omission. You firmly believe that your party should "run the show" after the revolution. I don't think you are telling the Venezuelan people that; I think you're just passing yourselves off as "super-bolivarians"...hoping that people will think (someday soon) that you are "even better than Chavez".

Should you successfully seize power, then "the truth will out".


Is it currently in your power to replace Chavez with something better?

No? Well then, shut the fuck up.

Do you have any "people's police" (armed thugs) to make us "shut up"?

No? Well then, go fuck yourself! :lol:

You can't suppress your "ultra-left" critics until you have state power, dummy.

Also, you're blowing your own cover...revealing one of your real intentions before you can carry it out.

Lenin & Trotsky would be all over your clumsy ass!

:redstar2000:

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

[Scottish_Militant]

So hold on a minute, you are saying that every comrade here who has defended the gains of the Bolivarian revolution want's to "get themselves in power" in Venezuela to "become a dictator"

I was crying with laughter when I read your post :lol:

I don't think you are capable of serious discussion Redstar, how can someone like myself, a gardener from the East of Scotland, hope to become the new dictator of a Venezuelan Stalinist police state???

Surely if we were all so mad and power hungry we'd simply be right wing capitalist types?

Do you really believe that apart from yourself and a handful of anarchists on this forum everyone else is fighting with secret motives pretending to be communists but secretly just trying to "become dictators"

Oh, and I was still waiting on you showing me the "lies" in the Hands Off Venezuela campaign articles, I was looking for examples and not more of your hot air (I have enough of this to fly at zepplin to Caracas)

[Daymare17]

Do you have any "people's police" (armed thugs) to make us "shut up"?

No? Well then, go fuck yourself!

You can't suppress your "ultra-left" critics until you have state power, dummy.

Also, you're blowing your own cover...revealing one of your real intentions before you can carry it out.

Lenin & Trotsky would be all over your clumsy ass!

Are you illiterate, stupid or just malicious? Did I say that I were going to "suppress" you? No! What I am saying is that Chavez' overthrow at this stage, where there as yet does not exist a revolutionary socialist alternative with majority backing, will not at all help the revolution. On the contrary the confusion will help the reaction and imperialism put up a right-wing regime. Do you deny it?

I said that I am firmly against the seizure of power by a revolutionary minority. How does this "blow my cover" and "reveal my real intentions"? I am for socialist revolution but the majority must be actively involved. So long as the masses trust Chavez then all I can do is to criticise him while of course supporting him against the reaction. In truth it is those who call for Chavez' overthrow who are the real anti-democrats.

As for your other drivel it can be refuted by reading one chapter: www.marxist.com/russiabook/part1.htm

[Louis Pio]

Redstar you indeed seems to be the model for Cervantes Don Quixote.
That you are extremely paranoid is not my problem and I think most members of this board can see you have a problem.
You chase windmills! And as I said it's not serious trying to portrait people in some way they are not.
Please get a grip, your old enough to not behave like a kid.
All we do is to fight for a socialist transformation of society in all the places this should be done. A society build on Soviets, maybe you should wait a while before you accuse other people of anything. What you do no is not serious, it's quit pathetic.
For you everything seems to be theoretic, how serious is that?

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 12:56 PM
To TAT, the anarchists and everyone else who calls for Chavez' overthrow:

Is it currently in your power to replace Chavez with something better?

No? Well then, shut the fuck up. Unless you yourself are in a position to take the power, calling for the overthrow (or sodomizing, in the case of TAT...) of Chavez can only help the reaction. Everyone who doesn't see this is a blind **** and a fucking counterrevolutionary. Until socialism has a majority, it's the duty of every socialist to fight the reaction, and fight for a majority.
Just because we cannot currently overthrow someone does not mean we can't criticize them. Persuading others that Chavez, or any other leader, should be overthrown is an important step towards getting in a position where we can actually do that. We don't want Chavez overthrown by the right, nor do we support their attempts to do so, we want him overthrown by the left. Your logic is the same kind of logic used by George Bush & the neoconservatives: "your'e either with us or your'e with the terrorists." We don't have the power to defeat either Bush or Islamic fundamentalists (many of whom are even more reactionary than Bush). Are we therefore supposed to stop criticizing either of them? Right-wingers make all sorts of nonsense about opponets of Bush helping Islamist terrorists, just as you claim left-wing opponets of Chavez help the right. It's the same bogus logic.

[Louis Pio]

Now this is of course abstract.
And since you are an anarchist I don't think we would agree.
Now however the whole problem is how you as a revolutionary get people to follow what you think.
1. you think you can overthrow Chavez by screaming it most of the time from aleft standpoint, people however have a lot of trust in him which would mean the don't listen.
2. you need to adress the movement, this includes their leaders especially Chavez.
These are crucial, considering that the situation in Venezuela now is close to that of Chile 1973 I would like to know how you would have behaved back then

[redstar2000]

...how can someone like myself, a gardener from the East of Scotland, hope to become the new dictator of a Venezuelan Stalinist police state???

It would seem an unlikely turn of fate, to be sure. :lol:

I was speaking of Venezuelan Trotskyists, of course...not their cheerleaders in the U.K.

For you guys, a successful Trotskyist "revolution" (coup) would be an enormous boost in your prestige and your recruiting prospects in the U.K.

I do find your current reticence puzzling...you yourselves are not in Venezuela, so why this unwillingness to acknowledge what the Trotskyist strategy really is?


Surely if we were all so mad and power hungry we'd simply be right wing capitalist types?

Yes, that's the popular "road to suck-cess".

But "madness" and "power-hunger" come in more than one form; there are those who experience these feelings for entirely altruistic reasons.

"Had I the power, I would raise up the lowly, bring down the mighty, and smite the evil-doers, etc."

So why not try to get that power?

Many people are still stuck in the mind-set of "seeking a redeemer" (hence the appeal of figures like Chavez)...why not be the "redeemer"?

Or at least the guy who holds the "redeemer's" overcoat?


Do you really believe...everyone else is fighting with secret motives pretending to be communists but secretly just trying to "become dictators"?

It's not a "secret"...at least to people on this board. Good grief, how many threads have we had where the Leninist paradigm was discussed in detail?

Perhaps it's because you sense "a real chance" in Venezuela that you've developed this sudden "coyness". In Venezuela, I expect you're circulating plenty of copies of the Spanish translation of State and Revolution.

Right now, it's "strategically important" to be perceived as "ultra-democratic".

If things go your way, then the strategy will change.


I said that I am firmly against the seizure of power by a revolutionary minority. How does this "blow my cover" and "reveal my real intentions"? I am for socialist revolution but the majority must be actively involved.

Of course the majority "must be actively involved"...until your party is actually in power. Then the majority must be...um, "actively obedient", how's that sound?


All we do is to fight for a socialist transformation of society in all the places this should be done.

Yes, that's true. It's also true that we know exactly what you mean by "a socialist transformation of society".

We have the practice of Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky to guide our "prediction".

It's not "rocket science".

:redstar2000:

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

[Guest1]

I consider myself an Anarchist, but as I said in the "would you support a Leninist revolution?" thread, I'll support every working class revolution from my perspective.

So Chavez's victory is still a victory for us right now in my opinion.

So long as we keep denouncing the cult personality building around him and work towards radicalizing the bolivarian circles, which have been ejecting the chavista bureaucrats by the way, there is nothing wrong with supporting this building revolution.

The key is the circles, and the alternative union being built parallel to the opposition one, which I believe are a developing alternative and threat to the bureaucracy in Venezuela. Chavez included. The radicalization of the bolivarian grass roots is leading the country inevitably towards a clash between the two wings of the movement. The right-wing, bougie contingent will attempt to hold on and preserve Capital and the State. Whereas the growing radical contingent have already begun a mini-war within the circles with them that will define the difference between a revolution, and reform.

If chavez is smart, or as trustworthy as some people think, he will not side with the dying elite. He'll step out of the way, maybe just as a kick in the nuts to Bush, even if he doesn't believe in Marxism himself :lol: If the Anarchists are right, and my gut feeling, he too will try to throw water on the fire and kill this where it stands.

Where I feel I differ from some of the people here, is I believe if that battle is won, no one proclaiming themselves to be saviours as Chavez is considered now will be trusted.

So no matter what plan your leadership may concoct, because I trust you, it won't be so easy to implement. If this situation breaks beyond "Chavizmo" and into working class revolution, it will not go down to another "Eternal Sunshine Of North Korea's Enlightened People".

Unless, that is, Chavez proclaims himself a Leninist and co-opts this whole thing.

That's the only thing I'm worried about. :ph34r:

[Louis Pio]

Redstar it's not serious saying people will do something just because they have to fill in in some model you see things in. If you could give concrete examples it would, that you however can't so shut up. It's not serious doing pocketphilosofic analysis. I don't accuse you of being a peadophile just because your old even though statisticly that would be more likely to be to case, so one should expect you had the common decency not to do the same.
Maybe the peadephile analogy is a bit far fetched, you do however get the picture. You don't accuse people of something they haven't done. You are getting more and more patetic in this, pocket philosofic analysis, accusations etc. One advice: lay of the booze!


Of course the majority "must be actively involved"...until your party is actually in power. Then the majority must be...um, "actively obedient", how's that sound?

Like a hard case of delirium tremens

[redstar2000]

Redstar, it's not serious saying people will do something just because they have to fill in some model you see things in.

Why not? We have a "model" of imperialism, do we not? What it routinely does and the reasons it does those things? The model is good enough that our predictions have a considerably better track record than chance, right?

From a Marxist standpoint, our model is historical and materialist -- it doesn't depend on "personal villainy", pathological "lust for power", or any such trivia.

In general form, it would say: if you want to do X in objective conditions Y, the result will be, if history is any guide, Z.

That has nothing to do with your "good intentions"...it's a product of what happens when Leninist parties approach (or believe they're approaching) the threshold of power.

I am not challenging your sincereity...I'm challenging your methodology.

The Venezuelan Trotskyist party is a party that, in Trotsky's words "knows what it wants to do".

And I am simply pointing out the obvious: that, if successful, "what it wants to do" will result in a party despotism and the emergence of a "Stalin-like" leader.

I repeat: it ain't rocket science.


You don't accuse people of something they haven't done.

I do whenever history strongly suggests that they will do it if they get the chance.

Oh, by the way, I'm neither a paedophile nor a drunk...and I can't imagine why you are reduced to such pathetic personal innuendos. It's as if I suggested that Trotskyists "are not above suspicion of cannibalism".

Why not explain, instead, how your variety of Leninism-Trotskyism proposes to avoid the fate of all other variants of Leninism in the last century.

For example, does your party renounce in advance all ambitions to "play the leading role" in the "new workers' state"? Do you have a hither-to unsuspected rule that says "no member of the party can be a state official of any kind"?

Don't know if that would really help...but it couldn't do any harm.

:redstar2000:

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

[Kez]

read this old man:
http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/cmr_declara..._august_15.html (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/cmr_declaration_august_15.html)

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 02:56 PM
Unless you yourself are in a position to take the power, calling for the overthrow (or sodomizing, in the case of TAT...) of Chavez can only help the reaction.
Or, it could build real opposition to capitalism and american imperialism depending on how you play it.


Everyone who doesn't see this is a blind **** and a fucking counterrevolutionary.

Yes, everyone who doesnt blindly follow the leader is a blind **** and a counterrevolutionary.

It is difficult to win either way for anarchists. Any genuine opposition will just be slapped down and called "counterrevolutionary" or simply just patronised as being "unrealistic" or "not really understanding the situation." If we do support Chavez, what do we achieve? Yet another politician taking control of a state and weilding it in the name of the working class. To what aim?


Until socialism has a majority, it's the duty of every socialist to fight the reaction, and fight for a majority.

Why does fighting the reaction and for a majority have to be supporting Chavez. Because he's there?

[Morpheus]

you need to adress the movement, this includes their leaders especially Chavez

I don't care about the leaders, I just want to overthrow them (all of them, left and right). Why should I address them? I'll address the common folk, they're the potential agents of revolutionary change.


the situation in Venezuela now is close to that of Chile 1973 I would like to know how you would have behaved back then

Chile was more radical in1973. Workers were taking over factories in significant quantities by the time of Pinochet's coup. That is not the case in Venezuala. In Chile I would have encouraged the radical elements of the movement and encouraged a break with Allende in favor of a working class revolution. If the workers hadn't been so dependant on Allende things might have been different. The same is true in Venezuala, except things aren't as radical.

[Kez]

"Why does fighting the reaction and for a majority have to be supporting Chavez. Because he's there?"

No body is giving support, were giving him critical support, huge difference, have you even read the declaration i posted the link of?

Morph:

"I'll address the common folk, they're the potential agents of revolutionary change."

-very good, something weve been doing as an organisation voer there for last 2 years. we talk to workers and poor.

"Chile was more radical in1973. Workers were taking over factories in significant quantities by the time of Pinochet's coup. That is not the case in Venezuala. In Chile I would have encouraged the radical elements of the movement and encouraged a break with Allende in favor of a working class revolution. If the workers hadn't been so dependant on Allende things might have been different. The same is true in Venezuala, except things aren't as radical. "

-Workers have taken over factories (and some been shot as a result by bosses)
-Workers took over oil rigs when there was a lockout
-worekrs are arming themselves (with the aid of Chavez who is training them with the army in villages)
-you encourage a breakaway from Chavez now, you'll have 1000-2000 supporters, what the fuck is that in a population of 14,000,000. you wanna be a sect, go for it. Isnt it better to be in a position where people can hear you and what you say, and when the time is right, to break away?

[redstar2000]

read this old man:

Read it.

Very fine words...ultra-democracy everywhere.

I thought it was interesting that the Trotskyists in Venezuela call themselves the "Revolutionary Marxist Current".

Does that mean that they are not a "vanguard party" or does it mean that they just don't want to call themselves that at this time?

Towards the end of the document appears this statement...


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.

Read literally, this suggests that they are frantically trying to pull together a vanguard party (that's what "cadre organization" means) while radicalizing the class struggle there all at the same time.

I don't think that weakens any of the points I've made in this thread...but it suggests a longer "time-frame" than your posts have implied.

Is it, in your view, "1905" in Venezuela?

:redstar2000:

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

[Daymare17]

A note on the vanguard for the "authority-fuckers".

Lessons Of The Paris Commune (1921) (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1921/1921-commune.htm)

[Daymare17]

btw the only thing redstars2000 has in common with marx is that theyre both damn old

[Daymare17]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 20 2004, 09:48 PM
Or, it could build real opposition to capitalism and american imperialism depending on how you play it.



Yes, everyone who doesnt blindly follow the leader is a blind **** and a counterrevolutionary.

It is difficult to win either way for anarchists. Any genuine opposition will just be slapped down and called "counterrevolutionary" or simply just patronised as being "unrealistic" or "not really understanding the situation." If we do support Chavez, what do we achieve? Yet another politician taking control of a state and weilding it in the name of the working class. To what aim?



Why does fighting the reaction and for a majority have to be supporting Chavez. Because he's there?

Or, it could build real opposition to capitalism and american imperialism depending on how you play it.

you retarded middle class sectarian reactionary piece of shit, you're worse than makhno. Do you ever do any serious work except for drowning revolutionary hisotry in an avalanche of lies and betraying your "principles" to become bourgeois ministers. If you're going to fart and cluck around like a senile old granny then at least try not to get in the way of the revolution like the miserable tin-pot ultraleft radical dandy you are. But no, no. you manage to end up in the most counterrev position possible.


It is difficult to win either way for anarchists.

thank god for that!

You betrayed the spanish revolution, you betrayed the bolshevik revlution. Everywhere your cocksure "principles" come up against the brick wall of reality. Your "principles" are those of disaffected bourgeois brats looking for a way to "stick it to the old man". Whenever a REAL CONCRETE revolution shows its face and threatens your right to sit around in cafés and "defy all authority", you betray it like the vain, contemptible individualist dogs you are. YOU BELONG IN THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY AND THAT IS WHERE HISTORY WILL PUT YOU!

[Guest1]

:lol:

Good laugh.

You disgust me man.

[PRC-UTE]

you retarded middle class sectarian reactionary piece of shit, you're worse than makhno

You betrayed the spanish revolution, you betrayed the bolshevik revlution. Everywhere your cocksure "principles" come up against the brick wall of reality. Your "principles" are those of disaffected bourgeois brats looking for a way to "stick it to the old man". Whenever a REAL CONCRETE revolution shows its face and threatens your right to sit around in cafés and "defy all authority", you betray it like the vain, contemptible individualist dogs you are. YOU BELONG IN THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY AND THAT IS WHERE HISTORY WILL PUT YOU!

Bollocks.


A note on the vanguard for the "authority-fuckers".

Lessons Of The Paris Commune (1921)

Funny, Marx drew a very different conclusion.

[Morpheus]

Workers have taken over factories (and some been shot as a result by bosses)

Not on the scale of Chille '73. So far it's fairly minimal in Venezuala, a few here & a few there but not on the large scale seen in Chille.


you encourage a breakaway from Chavez now, you'll have 1000-2000 supporters, what the fuck is that in a population of 14,000,000. you wanna be a sect, go for it. Isnt it better to be in a position where people can hear you and what you say, and when the time is right, to break away?

By that logic you should join the reformists, you'll be part of a much larger movement. The thing is, if your support is founded on supporting Chavez you'll never be able to break with Chavez without losing all your support. The focus on Chavez is a fatal weakness of Venezuala's workers' movement, and will probably be its downfall.

[Scottish_Militant]

Sorry I haven't replied, I was busy trying to take over the world.

A few different positions have appeared on this thread which is interesting, I choose to stand by the line that the spread of Marxist ideas inside the Chavista movent is the way to safegaurd the revolution and to work towards socialism.

There is however, no point in getting angry at those who disagree, if we all work towards the positions we believe (that does not mean sitting on discussion forums all day!) in then time will tell who is "right", although being "right" is not, or should not be the objective of a revolutionary, that obvective should be the aiding of socialist revolution.

thanks

[Kez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 04:33 AM
The thing is, if your support is founded on supporting Chavez you'll never be able to break with Chavez without losing all your support. The focus on Chavez is a fatal weakness of Venezuala's workers' movement, and will probably be its downfall.
How many times do i have to say, this is critical support, not simple blind support.
i encourage you to read the article posted if you wish to have a basic understanding of how our position works...

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 05:08 AM
you retarded middle class sectarian reactionary piece of shit,



Getting to you is it? Don't assume to know anything about me chump. You'll end up looking like a fool.

You say this...


Do you ever do any serious work except for drowning revolutionary hisotry in an avalanche of lies

...then you say this...


You betrayed the spanish revolution, you betrayed the bolshevik revlution.

Where's your proof sparky, or are we just to accept what your saying because Trotsky said it?


betraying your "principles" to become bourgeois ministers.

It is difficult to debate when all you do is throw rhetoric around, unless of course all your doing is trying to flame me? What is your point?


If you're going to fart and cluck around like a senile old granny then at least try not to get in the way of the revolution

Again, what is the point your trying to make?


But no, no. you manage to end up in the most counterrev position possible.

All I have argued is that supporting Chavez the way you people would have it is futile and counter productive. History has proven what happens when we place our trust in men like Chavez. He is mildly radical, and I do not think that is enough to outright support him.


Everywhere your cocksure "principles" come up against the brick wall of reality.

Really? Can you elaberate?


Your "principles" are those of disaffected bourgeois brats looking for a way to "stick it to the old man".

This is just nonesense. You are simply playing on a stereotype which is completely unfair considering the work that the British and Irish anarchist movements actually do.


Whenever a REAL CONCRETE revolution shows its face and threatens your right to sit around in cafés and "defy all authority".

Wild generalisations and down right lies are not going to help you, unless of course you have unrefutable evidence to support what your saying.


you betray it like the vain, contemptible individualist dogs you are

Individualist? Please know what your talking about when you talk it, it saves us time. I am not an individualist, in fact I dont think any of the anarchists argueing in this thread are individualists. Do you know the difference between social and individualist anarchism?


YOU BELONG IN THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY AND THAT IS WHERE HISTORY WILL PUT YOU!

How very un-sectarian of you :rolleyes:

[commiecrusader]

All I have argued is that supporting Chavez the way you people would have it is futile and counter productive. History has proven what happens when we place our trust in men like Chavez. He is mildly radical, and I do not think that is enough to outright support him.
to a certain extent i can agree with TAT here. in general in history, the accession of mild radicals has been somewhat disappointing. for example when Mugabe became president of Zimbabwe, he was radical compared to what was there at the time(although obviously he was not communist or anarchist or anything). but now he has turned into a power hungry dictator.

however if we view every revolution/political progression in this light then what are we fighting for? we have to throw all we have behind any attempt to progress left in terms of political ideas. and if it later becomes clear that what is happening is not what we want to happen, we need to push to change further. for now though, cant we at least enjoy some kind of victory for the left, and try to secure Chavez for the time-being at least, then consider what must be done next?

[redstar2000]

btw the only thing redstar2000 has in common with Marx is that they're both damn old

This is, perhaps, a demonstration of what happens to your common sense in Trotskyist circles.

I am, indeed, damn old. Marx, however, is dead.

There's a difference. :lol:

:redstar2000:

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

[commiecrusader]

lol thats pretty funny

:lol:

[Kez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 12:38 PM
How many times do i have to say, this is critical support, not simple blind support.
i encourage you to read the article posted if you wish to have a basic understanding of how our position works...
in answer to the The Anarchist Twat

[Daymare17]

Need to lay off the booze... lol

[Scottish_Militant]

Great contribution from "OglachMcGlinchey" - the forums very own flag humping promoter and terrorist arse licker, supporters of anything but a break with the capitalist system, better stick to balaclavas and car explosives, tit :lol:

[wet blanket]

Bah, all this hate for Chavez. The man is doing great things and hasn't done anything to warrant any distrust among the working people.

He's a good guy and people should watch what is happening in latin america. Good things are about to come.