[News] Venezuela - We Still Have Time to Change Course Away from Bourgeois Conciliation
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Mon May 5 11:28:08 EDT 2014
"We Still Have Time to Change Course Away from Bourgeois
Conciliation": An Interview with Activist and Aporrea Founder Gonzalo
Gomez
May 3rd 2014, by Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt /
Gonzalo Gomez
http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/10661
/The following is an interview with activist and founder of the
progressive Venezuelan news website Aporrea.org, Gonzalo Gomez,
conducted by the Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt. Gomez
speaks on Venezuela's current political moment in his capacity as a
member of Socialist Tide, a critical left current which organises within
the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV). Translation by
Venezuelanalysis.com. /
*María Elena Saludas (CADTM-AYNA): What is your vision of the moment
Venezuela is currently going through, both its government and its people?*
*Gonzalo Gomez: *From a political point of view, I speak as a member of
Socialist Tide (Marea Socialista), because Aporrea is a popular media
outlet, driven by a diverse team within the variety of thought of the
Bolivarian revolution. After the passing away of Comandante Chavez, the
bourgeoisie and their political expressions have felt that they have
arrived at a moment for a counter-revolutionary leap; with the support
of the imperialist sectors, of course. In this, they are cooperating
with the most reactionary and mafia-esque sectors of the Latin American
bourgeoisie, as shown by the close working relationship between the
Venezuelan right-wing, [former Colombian President Alvaro] Uribe and
Colombian paramilitarism.
They all seek to end the political hegemony that arose with the
Bolivarian Revolution, to return the rebel Venezuela to the straight and
narrow, and regain control of the oil revenue - the country's main
source of foreign exchange and resources. As a class, the bourgeoisie
has this purpose, although different sectors do not necessarily agree on
tactics and timing.
Without a doubt, objectively their methods combine, and the
contradictions produce a synthesis: the "stick" and "carrot" both fulfil
their respective roles. Because both in Venezuela and in Latin America
there is another face [of the reactionary forces], that is more
conciliatory, devious; which has its advocates who seeks to destroy the
Bolivarian Revolution through conciliation in obtaining concessions, the
wearing down of the government, or the establishment of a coalition
between the bourgeois sectors and members of the bureaucratic caste that
has formed throughout the Bolivarian process.
The whip of the "guarimba" (street barricades) - a violent insurgency
and paramilitary terrorism - serves the bourgeoisie by [allowing it] to
reap the fruits of negotiation with the "carrot" of peace, at the
negotiating table with the government of Nicolas Maduro. The "guarimba"
and the acts of violence continue, even when they aren't gaining ground
in the poorer layers of the population, and they are fundamentally an
expression of the desperation of the small bourgeoisie and mercenary
involvement. The only thing that has come out of the Peace Conference
and the mesas [talks between the government and business groups], are
concessions to business: price increases, facilities for the obtaining
of larger amounts of dollars and the enjoyment larger portions of oil
revenues. From these spaces they insist on the dismantling of the
victories of the working class, of the campesinos [rural workers] and
the popular sectors, such as job security and other achievements of the
new Labour Law that employers and labour authorities are already
ignoring in practice.
At the same time, the political leadership of the bourgeoisie is trying
to make the Maduro government pay the political costs of the measures
that are to be adopted at the demand of business, to ensure an
increasing political attrition against the people. Clearly, the
right-wing also has to pay a political price for their clumsy offensive,
which has been seen with the majority of the public and their own voters
rejecting their repugnant actions, such as assassinations and violent
actions against public services, education centres, health centres,
public transport and public property.
*CADTM: As mentioned at the beginning, there were multiple international
campaigns to demonise President Hugo Chavez during the course of his
mandate, the coup of 11/04/2002 (when he was very close to being
assassinated), the "petroleum strike" and so many attacks that, without
doubt, were used by Chavez to radicalise his political project. Do you
think something similar is happening right now? And if not, what are the
differences presented by the situation?*
*G.G: *Yes indeed. Previous coup attempts during Chavez's life were
defeated by the Venezuelan people, and produced progress in the
political project, both from the democratic point of view and with
material, economic, social and sovereign victories. This helped Chavez
to go on and radicalise the process despite Chavez also opening
opportunities for dialogue with the bourgeoisie, but with the people
mobilised and setting the agenda of discussion. I see that now the
situation is different, because the violent pressure of the right-wing
hasn't ceased, and the talks have given in to the demands of business,
with the 12 points of industry of Lorenzo Mendoza. Chavez was the one
who used to set the rules of the game, but now I feel this is not so,
because there is no discussion of how entrepreneurs engage the
government program - the Homeland Plan - and the right-wing abandoning
violence, but there is an implied condition that the government gives
them benefits that they are claiming, without the direct consultation of
the people.
The bourgeoisie used to leech upon the oil revenue, but with Chavez and
the Bolivarian Revolution we were able to change PDVSA [state oil
company] from being a "meritocracy" and establish control over the
currency exchange system to get hold of the dollars to invest in
government social programs (the missions), large infrastructure projects
and endogenous industrial development. However in recent years - and
especially since Chavez became ill - the bourgeoisie has found ways to
split and resume the looting of income, not without the help of the
civil bureaucracy, the corrupt state apparatus and government sectors.
Without these levers that control the oil revenue and dollars, the
fundamental supports of the socialist transition and the building of a
non-capitalist economy based on social property will fall down.
What predominate the peace talks now are agreements with the capitalist
sectors. At this stage we suffer from a [lack of] a real voice and the
participation of the revolutionary element in the decision making
process: the working class and the Bolivarian people. Chavez left us his
legacy and a program that we voted for, and in one of his last messages
he proposed a "Golpe de Timon" [Turn of the Wheel] in order to
decisively advance towards a socialist transition. But another discourse
is now being proposed, which is about the "co-existence of models".
Discussion is no longer about socialism of the 21^st century, but of two
systems, where in reality there only exists one: the capitalist system,
though still with social regulations, political achievements and
elements of sovereignty, seized by the revolution.
The government has not relented on important issues, like the amnesty
requests for the counter-revolutionaries who have incurred in serious
human rights violations and fascist-style actions. However the violent
pressure and political pressure, the so-called "economic war", are a way
to put the government against a wall - a trap that can only be escaped
by calling upon the Bolivarian people for a broader and more forceful
mobilisation and encouragement with measures favourable to their
interests and expectations.
*CADTM: We know about the important social gains that have been produced
in 15 years of the process of the Bolivarian revolution. We also have
information about the sharpening economic problems in recent months
(inflation, shortages of basic products, currency exchange issues and
capital flight). What is your view of this? What's being done and what
should be done? What proposals are being discussed within the left and
grassroots movements? *
*G.G:* On one hand there is a "sustained economic war" that shows its
effects in hoarding, scandalous speculation, extraction contraband [of
goods to Colombia], currency fraud and capital flight, among other
manifestations. However corruption and the bureaucratic braking of
revolutionary transformation have prevented the advance of the primary
[state-run] industries and new projects of rupture with capitalist
logic; communal and social property, worker control, and the agrarian
revolution. It's also necessary to recognise the problems for
organisation, political education and the participation of social
movements and the working class. We have a bureaucracy that appears more
interested in benefitting from the transactions of the state captured
from the bourgeoisie, and in reaching arrangements with them, than
really driving the state to a revolutionary transformation.
Socialist Tide has been proposing that we need to go toward Chavez's
"Turn of the Wheel" [in reference to a critical speech former president
Hugo Chavez made following his re-election in October 2012] and not
toward the "coexistence of models". We insist that we base ourselves on
what we call the fundamental constituting elements of the Bolivarian
revolutionary process, and that we need to rejuvenate the grassroots
foundational process that this revolution opened. This is because in
reality it seems to us that we've not moved past so called
"representative democracy", and that democratic and protagonistic
participation, as with popular power, is becoming a myth, because
decision-making is concentrated in the hands of a bureaucracy that's
inclined to give greater participation to the bourgeoisie than the
working class and the people in the exercise of governance.
In various documents published throughout 2013 and the beginning of 2014
we've presented our proposals as a political faction of workers, youths
and grassroots activists that in our majority are members of the PSUV
[United Socialist Party of Venezuela], although we lack [access to] true
spaces for debate and decision-making in the party's heart. We propose
various main points such as the following: (1) the recovery of salaries,
(2) the full implementation of job security and the entire Labour Law
passed by Chavez, (3) to stop the authorisation of price increase of
basic goods, (4) to reactivate the social missions, (5) in the framework
of the defence of the process , to end persecution and criminalisation
of workers that fight for labour rights and conditions, with whom the
government is sometimes more severe than with the right-wing, (6) to
maintain the control and progressive distribution of the dollars that
come from oil sales, because we denounce that the creation of the SICAD
II [a new, more flexible currency exchange system] and the modification
of the Law of Illegal Currency Exchange open the door to private sector
appropriation of our oil wealth.
In the economy we have been saying that not one dollar more should be
given to the bourgeoisie and that the state should monopolise all
foreign trade below social and anti-corruption control, so that it is
the only importer of our people's essential goods. This social and
anti-corruption control is fundamental, because we have the phenomenon
of bureaucratisation, and due to this we need the intervention of
grassroots power and worker organisations. We propose national
centralisation with social control [i.e. administrative accountability]
of all the country's dollars, both those that enter through oil sales
and those that are deposited in foreign accounts.
We say that there should be an intervention into the private banking
system, with state and social control and the participation of banking
workers, as with the centralised control in the same terms of all funds
which publically-owned banks manage.
For us the recuperation of state production of food and items of basic
consumption, and the reactivation and re-strengthening of the recovered
[nationalised or worker run] companies, allowing the genuine exercise of
worker control, is urgent. And facing the operation of hoarding,
speculation and extraction contraband in which great private companies
are involved, we believe that it's necessary to effect their
expropriation below grassroots and worker control. It's not capitalists
who should be called upon to "save" national production, as the
government seems to be implicitly doing.
On 14 February 2014, at the beginning of the explosion of the
"guarimbas" [militant opposition street blockades], we said in a
statement that Socialist Tide decidedly declares its commitment in
defence of the Bolivarian process against any coup attempt, even though
this may be masked with mobilisations of sympathisers of the right wing
in the streets. In this statement, our faction alerted that "to continue
on the path of adaptation to the demands of the capitalists we will
enter a situation of retreat and irrecoverable lack of control".
There we affirmed that for Socialist Tide it is an error and a danger to
oscillate toward the application of measures demanded by the right-wing
instead of sustaining and deepening measures like those applied on 6
November 2013 [forced price reductions and sale of speculatively-priced
goods], that were necessary to defend against the "economic war" and
pro-coup plans promoted by the bourgeoisie, in the framework of the 8
December municipal elections. These measures gave positive political and
economic results, strengthening the government's and Bolivarian people's
position in that moment.
Due to this we call upon the government of President Maduro to "rectify
and implement anti-capitalist measures to guarantee supply, halt the
uncontrolled increase in prices, and set in motion a new phase of the
Bolivarian process," together with other measures [designed] for the
political and economic emergency.
We aren't opposed to there being peace talks or dialogue [with the
opposition], but these should be conducted with the agenda of the
revolution and with the participation and effective consultation of the
people, because the Venezuelan people voted in their majority for a
government and a program that the opposition cannot continue trying to
ignore or sabotage. That's where the issue of impunity enters that the
opposition tries to use in reverse against the government and the
people, when they [the opposition] are those responsible for very
serious destruction and horrible crimes. That's why we say that the
political leaders and instigators of the guarimbas, of fascist violence,
such as Leopoldo Lopez, Maria Corina Machado and the mayor Antonio
Ledezma, should be tried and punished with prison. Beyond them, their
accomplices and financiers should pay reparations to the country for the
damage caused, via the confiscation of their assets and bank accounts,
and they should pay compensation to the victims.
The social organisations and political currents of the revolution are
debating what to do, and what the course of the government and our
revolutionary process should be.
*CADTM: The Venezuelan opposition is using violence and disinformation
to supplant the democratically elected government of Nicolas Maduro with
a transition government. What are the opposition's social, economic and
political proposals? Do they have a list of demands or a program? What
interests do they have and who is behind this project? *
*G.G: *The opposition, when it presented itself for presidential
elections with the defeated candidate Capriles Radonski, had a program
called the Program of the MUD [the opposition coalition]. This was
neoliberal, but they tried to muddy the waters and give sectors of the
Bolivarian people the impression that they would conserve some of the
more important gains, such as the benefits of the missions [social
programs]. However as soon as they rose up and refused to recognise the
[April 2013 presidential] election result, the first thing they attacked
was the missions, lighting Barrio Adentro modules [health clinics] and
Comprehensive Diagnostic Centres on fire, just like how the guarimbas
now are capable of burning centres for education or the distribution of
subsidised goods to the people.
After the coup of April 2002, the opposition declared the suspension of
all constituted public powers, flagrantly violating the constitution, as
they have done again with every new destabilisation attempt and with
fascist style violence. That, and what they do in everyday economic
practice, as with their pro-imperialist conduct, is what indicates to us
what their program is and not just what they may write on a piece of
paper or what their spokespeople say. Before the explosion of the
guarimba offensive a group of prominent bourgeois economists presented
their vision of the political economy that should replace the
government's one, and then in the Peace Conference the 12 Mendoza Points
were presented [in reference to Lorenzo Mendoza, the executive president
of Venezuela's food giant, the Polar Group], which included
counter-labour reforms, elements of labour flexibility and the
liberalisation of the economy in favour of capital and to the detriment
of labour.
The whole bourgeois opposition would like to get rid of Maduro, with
harder or softer methods, as does imperialism. However some understand
that chavismo is a state of consciousness of the people and can't be
erased all in one go. They perceive that it's a historical current with
deep roots, linked to our national identity, a sense of independence and
the Bolivarian ideology. It is also linked to a set of social and
political gains which are very appreciated by the people. It includes
the Legacy of Chavez, and his sentimental-symbolic power, that already
demonstrated its mobilising strength on 13 April 2002, in the struggle
against the oil industry sabotage and strike, and in the presidential
election of October 2012 and Chavez's funeral in 2013. Still today a
good part of this force is channelled through Nicolas Maduro and other
leaders of chavismo, despite the criticisms and weaknesses of the
government. Therefore, there are sectors of the opposition, of the
bourgeoisie, that understand that it's by penetrating and assimilating
chavismo itself, or better said, its bureaucratic establishment already
turned into bourgeoisie, that they can guarantee counter-reforms and the
following liquidation of the Bolivarian revolution. This is the great
strategy that's in motion.
*CADTM: The role of Venezuela, with the government of Comandante Hugo
Chavez Frias and its continuation with President Nicolas Maduro, has
been and is very important in the process of the integration of Our
America: the emergence of the ALBA, of Petrocaribe [regional alliances
led by Venezuela], of the Bank of the South, of the Sucre
[currency]...etc. We believe that it would be a serious setback for the
integration of the peoples if the correlation of forces in Venezuela was
modified, or if this state coup attempt is intensified. How do you
perceive the situation? Furthermore, do you think that the UNASUR [Union
of South American Nations] is really contributing to the process of
finding a solution to the conflict which has been unleashed? What does
the so-called peace conference promoted by the government consist of,
and what is your perception of this? *
*G.G: *Of course it would be a terrible setback for the integration of
the peoples and for the full independence of Latin America and the
Caribbean. But this isn't only decided within Venezuela. There is a
whole global process being played out on the Latin American level, which
includes the "institutional" coups in some countries, the changes that
are being made in Cuba, the negotiations with the FARC [Revolutionary
Armed Forces of Colombia], the new approach between [Ecuadorian
president Rafael] Correa and the World Bank and International Monetary
Fund, and where there are politicians that in the background work in
favour of the conciliation of classes, as happens with [former Brazilian
president] Lula da Silva.
The UNASUR serves the purpose of containing the impetus of imperialism
and the violence of the Venezuelan right, but we shouldn't forget that
the UNASUR brings together the Latin American bourgeois states and their
governments, among which there are still governments with
anti-imperialist and progressive characteristics, but it's not an
autonomous space of the peoples themselves, nor of the working and rural
classes of South America. Therefore, although it can work to diffuse the
Venezuela right, it can also work to moderate the Bolivarian revolution
and make it innocuous for the dominant bourgeois groups. It's necessary
to try and use the positive aspects implicated in the existence of the
UNASUR in favour of the peoples and not the prevailing oligarchies in
our countries.
*CADTM: Thank you for the interview. We'd like you to finish with some
final thoughts. *
*G.G: *We say in the statement I mentioned that we still have time to
change the course of the conciliation with the bourgeoisie, of stopping
the fascist offensive and of spearheading firm anti-capitalist measures
with the democratic participation of the people that live from their
labour. For this it is necessary that the Bolivarian government, that's
being pressured by the bourgeoisie and imperialism from the right, feels
the counterweight of the pressure of the worker and grassroots struggle
to maintain the course toward the left. These sectors, for now, are
waiting with expectation, observing what the government of Nicolas
Maduro does and with its mobilising capacity intact, although contained.
However, maybe sooner rather than later, they could begin to come out in
defence of their threatened gains, and then we'll see where things
incline towards in Venezuela. This is what we're wagering on so that
instead of being trapped in webs of conciliation, bureaucracy,
counter-reform and utopian "coexistence" with capitalism, we can recover
the Bolivarian revolution, so that it continues its course in the
transition to socialism with the full exercise of democracy.
/Translated and edited by Ewan Robertson and Ryan Mallet Outtrim for
Venezuelanalysis.com/
--
Freedom Archives 522 Valencia Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415
863.9977 www.freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20140505/011da3da/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list