PANDEMONIUM REVOLUTIONARY
SPECIAL
News Review
No. 1040
N
FULL SPECTRUM EMANCIPATION IN
VENEZUELA
*** Opposition soups up fraud campaign with street actions to show the real majority.
.*** Venezuela y lecciones históricas de la Revolución Sudafricana
U.S.Crusade | RaceandHistory | Rastafari | HowComYouCom | News Links | WWW Search | Trinicenter |
![]() |
![]() |
ALL TRINI NEWS![]() WORLD NEWS |
Hello juttafranz! [ Logout ] | Home | Account | Recommend Us | Online Forums | September 13, 2004 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
El
Decreto de creación ya fue firmado por el presidente
Chávez
MinCi: Gobierno creará nueva telefónica para competir con Cantv Por:
Agencias
Publicado el Lunes, 13/09/04 08:49pm |
|
||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
Monday, Sep 13, 2004 | ![]() |
Print format |
![]() |
Send by email |
By: Robin Nieto - Venezuelanalysis.com
![]() |
Chavez during
his weekly Sunday telelvision program "Alo Presidente" Credit: Venpres |
Caracas, September 13, 2004—President Hugo Chavez announced yesterday in his weekly television program “Alo Presidente” the creation of The Ministry of the “Popular Economy,” which will group various state institutions that deal with supporting cooperatives and micro-businesses. Chavez appointed Elias Jaua, the former president of the Venezuelan inter-governmental fund for decentralization (FIDES), as the new minister and also announced increased funding for “Vuelvan Caras,” a national social program that deals with unemployment.
The new office the Popular Economy will join under its direction, the National Institute for Rural Development (INDER), the development bank for microfinance (FONDEMI), the Woman’s Bank, the People’s Bank, the Cooperatives Institute (Sunacoop) and the National Institute of Cooperative Education (INCE), Chavez said.
The earlier ministry for the Social Economy, which had been in charge of many of the institutions that the new ministry for the Popular Economy will now be directing, will be dissolved. Also, a new Ministry of Financing for Development will be created, which will control the National Bank of Development (Bandes), the Industrial Bank of Venezuela (BIV), and the Development Bank of the Andes (Banfoandes). Nelson Merentes, the former head of the Ministry of the Social Economy will direct this new ministry.
$170 million for job creation program “Vuelvan Caras”
During his weekly televised program yesterday, the president also announced $170 million for the “Vuelvan Caras” mission, which is a social program designed to create employment through community development projects across the country. The program works closely with 2,067 cooperatives, with a goal of working with more than 5 times that number within three months, according to Chavez. There are 287,000 people currently enrolled in the program and Chavez said he wants this number to reach 408,000 by the end of this month.
New Ministry of Nutrition
The recently created Ministry of Nutrition has a new minister, José Rafael Oropeza. Various food security institutions will be part of this ministry, including the Strategic Nutrition Program (Proal), the Automonous Corporation for Autonomous Services (Casa), and the Mercal program, which sells basic food products at subsidized prices in poor communities.
As part of the plans for this new ministry, Chavez also announced the creation of seven new Supermercales across the country (for a total of 26), 12 new medium sized Mercales and 95 smaller Mercales. And in two months time, the government will open 1974 “Mercalitos,” or small Mercales bringing the number of the smallest discount food stores to 6,423. Chavez also announced the inauguration of 1,830 new food relief kitchens, bringing the total number of kitchens providing prepared meals for the poor across the country to 2,886.Opposition soups up fraud campaign with street actions to show the real majority
Venezuela's opposition has announced the beginning of street actions to back accusations that the Venezuelan government through the National Elections Council (CNE) committed massive electoral fraud at thee August 15 recall referendum, robbing the opposition of a clear victory in revoking the mandate of President Hugo Chavez Frias.
Most of the columnists in El Universal and El Nacional broadsheets have taken up the clarion call, explaining why the fraud campaign is important for Venezuelan democracy.
Last week, Coordinadora Democratica (CD) street action
coordinator, Pablo Medina launched the initiative and the
challenge has been taken up. CD deputy, Oscar Perez says demonstrations
will take place as of today Sunday to back the handing in of fraud
denunciations at the CNE HQ last Friday (September 10).
Pablo Medina
"The organized opposition is not prepared to let go of the August 15 page or to tear out the October 31 (regional elections) page ... no quarter will be given and we will attack on all fronts to ensure respect for the electors' will."
On Friday, main opposition
legal adviser, Delsa Solorzano led a committee to the CNE to hand over a document containing 1.077 alleged cases of fraud committed
during
the recall referendum.
Delsa Solorzano
Solorzano says the denunciations are mostly complaints from electors and also contain irregularities dating from alleged government violation of a negotiations agreement the opposition signed in May 2003.
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=22743Commentary | ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Published: Sunday, September 12, 2004
Bylined to: Franz J. T. Lee
Franz J. T. Lee: World energy crisis ... the Venezuelan context
University of
Los Andes (ULA) professor Franz J. T. Lee writes: Do
we really have a "World Energy Crisis"? Is there a global, historical
connection between this "crisis" and the dramatic social events in
Venezuela?
And why is Latin America a revolutionary time-bomb?
Already on June 12, 2000, in an article: "The Unnecessary Energy Crisis: How to Solve It Quickly", T. E. Bearden, LTC, U.S. Army (Retired) CEO, CTEC Inc., the Director of the Association of Distinguished American Scientists (ADAS) and a Fellow Emeritus of the Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS), explained the energetic quintessence of the current world recession, depression and crisis.
In the last analysis, within this "crisis," the current problems of Venezuela, the war on Afghanistan and Iraq, the imperialist policies of Russia vis-a-vis the Balkan peoples, the counter-revolutionary roles of Israel in the Middle East and of South Africa on the African continent, have to be seen.
Firstly, a very careful historical politico-economic study of the revolutionary processes of the accumulation of world capital, of the various modes of production on the planet, will reveal that all the well-known, dramatic, dialectical, intra-systemic changes that have occurred, basically concern the radical transformations of energy and technological sources and resources.
This applies to all productive processes, from the stone-axe to the computer, from the use of man-power to horse-power, to Pentagon "Aliens", to United States "Flying Saucers", leaving Los Alamos, driven on by Tesla energy and technology, already discovered and partially probably used since the end of the 19th Century.
Historically, as intrinsic part of the even, uneven and combined development, slave labor clashed with agricultural manual labor, the latter survived, then, later, as a result of the "Emancipation of the Slaves" and the "Industrial Revolution", both were superseded predominantly by industrial production, by modern factory labor.
The British textile industry necessitated wool, thus sheep drove the peasants off their ancestral lands, food production diminished, vagrant laws eliminated the unemployed serfs, that is, progressively destroyed the obsolete agricultural energetic resources.
Nowadays, as a result of a "Global Revolution," six billion already obsolete manual industrial and agricultural laborers, as forces of production, as energetic forces, are continually being eliminated from the global market. So-called "intellectual labor," "intellectual property," "human capital" or "global social and natural resources of mankind" ... for example, Amazonia ... not only usher in the current fascist stage of a mode of global destruction, but also of a still possible post-productive mode of creativity and creation, thus, also nurturing already existent, alternative, energetic sources and resources, that could give birth to trans-revolutionary possibilities and emancipatory realities.
This is the trans-historic background in which the current Bolivarian Revolution has to be placed, be seen, as part of the tip of the emancipatory, creative iceberg -- for it, for the impoverished millions of Latin America, to be anything else, surely would mean, regression, stagnation, vegetation, reform, self-annihilation.
Venezuela, as one of the main suppliers of the "long term" already obsolete energetic resources of oil and gas, is directly affected by current "new wars" by the EURO-US "world mode of destruction"; hence, let us summarize what an expert in this matter, Thomas Bearden warned about ... that is, in how far the global "energy crisis" affects Venezuela and Latin America, and why the permanent, ferocious, global, globalized attacks against the Bolivarian Revolution.
Already in 2000, what did Bearden tell us with reference to the current "world energy crisis"?
"The world energy crisis is now driving the economies of the world nations. Presently there is an escalating worldwide demand for electrical power and transportation, much of which depends on fossil fuels and particularly oil or oil products. The resulting demand for oil is expected to increase year by year. Recent sharp rises in some U.S. metropolitan areas included gasoline at more than $2.50 per gallon already.
*At the same time, it appears that world availability of oil may have peaked in early 2000, if one factors in the suspected Arab inflation of reported oil reserves. From now on it appears that oil availability will steadily decline, slowly at first but then at an increasing pace."
Concerning the "some 160 nations," mainly of South America, Africa and Asia, who live outside the big metropolitan countries, he explained their immediate future:
"The transfer of manufacturing and production to many of these nations is a transfer to essentially "slave labor" nations where workers have few if any benefits, are paid extremely low wages, work long hours, and have no unions or bargaining rights. The local politicians can usually be "bought" very cheaply so that there are also no effective government controls. This has set up a de facto return to the feudalistic capitalism of an earlier era when enormous profits could be and were extracted from the backs of impoverished workers, and government checks and balances were nil."
Very accurately he foresaw the current collapse of the global economy:
"Bluntly, we foresee these factors and others { } not covered converging to a catastrophic collapse of the world economy in about eight years. As the collapse of the Western economies nears, one may expect catastrophic stress on the 160 developing nations as the developed nations are forced to dramatically curtail orders."
Thus, how do the desperate actions of blowing up "Twin Towers" and declaring "new wars" on Afghanistan and Iraq, including oil sabotage in Venezuela, fit into this gruesome picture?
And, who all are more desperate?
Surely, less North Korea or Iran, but in the first place, certainly, the United States Administration, with its fascist Janus-face, Bush-Kerry, Corporate America, but also the "opposition" in Venezuela, Carter, Gaviria and Gustavo Cisneros.
"History bears out that desperate nations take desperate actions. Prior to the final economic collapse, the stress on nations will have increased the intensity and number of their conflicts, to the point where the arsenals of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) now possessed by some 25 nations, are almost certain to be released. As an example, suppose a starving North Korea { } launches nuclear weapons upon Japan and South Korea, including US forces there, in a spasmodic suicidal response."
Below, he explained the capitalist, corporate, energetic reasons for the establishment of the current "Fourth Empire" and why the issues at stake are so urgent for the survival of the current "world order" for "world peace." In other words, he indicated why Iraq and Afghanistan need "regime change," why Iran and Venezuela are next on the list, and why President Chavez' "understanding of democracy" is "out-dated."
"The resulting great Armageddon will destroy civilization as we know it, and perhaps most of the biosphere, at least for many decades.
My personal estimate is that ... beginning about 2007 ... on our present energy course we will have reached an 80% probability of this 'final destruction of civilization itself' scenario occurring at any time, with the probability slowly increasing as time passes. One may argue about the timing, slide the dates a year or two, etc., but the basic premise and general time frame holds. We face not only a world economic crisis, but also a world destruction crisis."
Well, we have passed the critical year, 2003, the following await us:
"The 2003 date appears to be the critical 'point of no return' for the survival of civilization as we have known it. Reaching that point, say, in 2005 will not solve the crisis in time, and the collapse of the world economy as well as the destruction of civilization and the biosphere will still almost certainly occur, even with the solutions in hand. ... Eerily, this very threat now looms in our not too distant future, due in large part to the increasing and unbearable stresses that escalating oil prices will elicit. So about seven years or so from now, we will enter the period of the threat of the Final Armageddon, unless we do something very, very quickly now, to totally and permanently solve the present 'electrical energy from oil crisis.'"
Of course, Thomas Bearden is not a socialist, he wants the best for Corporate America. Thus, according to him, what is required to solve the problem? Venezuela, listen very carefully to what he said.
"To avoid the impending collapse of the world economy and/or the destruction of civilization and the biosphere, we must quickly replace much of the 'electrical energy from oil' heart of the crisis at great speed, and simultaneously replace a significant part of the "transportation using oil products" factor also. ... In the name of all humanity, let us begin! Else by the time this first decade of the new millennium ends, much of humanity may not remain to see the second decade."
Other solutions that he has suggested, could be read in the document referred to above, however, according to him, it is now already too late. No real measure was taken to avoid a global catastrophe.
In any event, la lutta continua, but it is important to see the real, true, historic context of the current Bolivarian Revolution; surely, the solution of problems is to be found neither in "away with Chávez" nor in "away with the Opposition."
Precisely this global situation has produced the Bolivarian Revolution, it is its alma mater, its emancipatory matrix. We have to solve our immediate short term problems, but even they are dictated by trans-historic long term processes and developments. We have to arm ourselves, practically, militarily, theoretically, philosophically, and creatively, that is, in toto, we have to enter the horizons of invisible, invincible, invulnerable, emancipatory spheres.
Till now, definitely, the Bolivarian revolution is an excellent, remarkable, emancipatory paradigm: Hasta la Victoria Siempre! A Paso de Vencedores!
Franz J. T. Lee
franzjutta@cantv.net
Franz
John Tennyson Lee, Ph. D (University of Frankfurt), Author, Professor
Titular & Chairholder of Philosophy and Political Science,
University of The
Andes, Merida (Venezuela) -- http://www.franzjutta.com
; http://www.franz-lee.org
;
http://www.geocities.com/juttafranz/publications00001.html
)
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=22749
***********************************************
REBELION.ORG |
![]() |
08-09-2004 |
A la vuelta del tercer milenio,
entre otros intentos globales emancipatorios, dos revoluciones sociales
sobresalientes marcan la época actual globalizada: las
Revoluciones Sudafricana y Bolivariana. Cada una de ellas es pionera en
cuanto a las lecciones transhistóricas, las cuales tienen que
ser tomadas en cuenta urgentemente, por todos los emancipadores y
revolucionarios permanentes.
Concentrándonos en la Revolución Sudafricana, sólo
resaltaremos los principales problemas sociales revolucionarios que
están en juego. Dentro de nuestras deliberaciones son obvias las
referencias
a las tareas inmediatas de la Revolución Bolivariana y los
caminos
peligrosos y llenos de serpentinas que hay que tomar.
Comenzamos con la Revolución Sudafricana. Primero tenemos que
revelar algunos mitos que rodean a Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki y el
Congreso Nacional Africano de Sudáfrica (ANC), para colocar a la
Revolución Sudafricana en su verdadero contexto
histórico. Como en el caso de Venezuela, fueron precisamente los
medios masivos nacionales e internacionales que han pintado una imagen
de la dinámica de la lucha anti-Apartheid de una manera
totalmente distorsionada y manipulada. En realidad, la victoria del ANC
es al mismo tiempo la victoria del imperialismo corporativo en Africa.
Allí no hubo ninguna revolución social verdadera, al
contrario, ésta ha sido eliminada por completo.
Como resultado de las principales corrientes políticas e
ideológicas, que inundaron a Africa durante el siglo 20 - el
nacionalismo africano, el pan-africanismo, el socialismo africano y la
democracia reconciliadora (el "neoliberalismo salvaje") - el ANC
llegó a ser "nacionalista" y "anti-imperialista" (lo que sea que
signifique este concepto vago y generalizado), pero, como se puede
testimoniar por Nelson Mandela en su famoso discurso ante la Corte
Sudafricana fascista, "Estoy preparado para morir", durante toda su
lucha, (el ANC) nunca fue realmente anti-capitalista.
Para ser realmente "anti-imperialista", uno tiene que ser
verdaderamente "anti-capitalista", y para ser esto, uno tiene que
estudiar científico y filosóficamente la economía
política, la historia, la conciencia de clases y la "lucha de
clases", es decir, el verdadero
socialismo científico.
A pesar del hecho de que el Partido Comunista de Sudáfrica
- originalmente estalinista - había acompañado al ANC,
prácticamente, en la actual subasta y privatización de
los medios de producción, podemos presenciar lo poco que fue
estudiado y entendido en cuanto al socialismo científico y
filosófico. En ninguna parte es posible una
emancipación social sin el conocimiento de los fundamentos del
Marxismo
revolucionario. Esto también vale para la Revolución
Bolivariana.
Los medios masivos internacionales han fabricado cuidadosamente a
"Nelson Mandela, el mito", el icono político anti-Apartheid del
siglo 20 tardío. No es nuestro intento de disminuir las luchas
heroicas
y los sufrimientos personales del gran líder Sudafricano,
aquí estamos resaltando más bien una imagen internacional
que se ha dibujado del hombre y del ANC, que contrasta fuertemente con
el saqueo de la riqueza del pueblo sudafricano por parte de las
compañías corporativas, bajo su aceptación
silenciosa. Así que tenemos que tener mucho cuidado con figuras
tan mesiánicas, carismáticas y "populistas", como las
crean CNN, Fox, BBC, etc.
Hace un rato, cuando la figura carismática de Nelson Mandela se
retiró, fue claro que era más un reformista que un
revolucionario y las hambrientas esperanzas de millones de "Negros"
sudafricanos ya se habían disminuido, porque Sudáfrica -
como resultado de la subasta económica por parte del
imperialismo corporativo - ya estaba sumergida en miseria, hambre,
epidemias, analfabetismo, pobreza y criminalidad sin precedentes. Hasta
el Banco Mundial tuvo que admitir que la distribución del
ingreso nacional era crónicamente abismal y que a escala global,
esta desigualdad social sólo la supera Brasil. Por ejemplo,
todavía hoy, en la sociedad post-Apartheid, los ingresos
mensuales de una familia de Africanos promedian los R 757 comparado con
los R 4.695 para los llamados "blancos"..., ni siquiera este esfuerzo
reformista dio fruto alguno.
El ANC hizo todo para sostener una clase media "negra" próspera
y parasítica, para sustituir las clases dominantes
británicas y de los Boers, pero la brecha entre las clases ricas
y las clases pobres en Sudáfrica incrementa diariamente a punta
de brincos y saltos. Los proyectos de reforma social originales han
sido desechados y sustituidos por una lucha por la riqueza de esta
misma clase media "negra", cuyo núcleo se constituye por los
antiguos "luchadores por la libertad" del ANC. Por lo tanto, una
lección importante para nosotros es: ¡Cuidado con la
"clase media"! Es el fundamento social y el epicentro de una
discriminación social virulenta, o sea, del racismo (no importa
si es blanco o negro) y del fascismo.
Sin embargo, todo lo que está ocurriendo actualmente, ya lo he
pronosticado hace casi tres décadas en mi libro, "Südafrika
am Vorabend der Revolution" (Sudáfrica en
vísperas de la Revolución, Editorial ISP, Francfort del
Mein, 1976):
"Un elemento giratorio en esta estrategia entera del gobierno
sudafricano es la creación de una burguesía negra
subordinada entre los diferentes 'naciones' africanas; estas clases
elitescas son apoyadas en ensanchar la base del Estado capitalista
Sudafricano. Cada una se esforzará en captar y mantener 'su
propio' mercado 'nacional' en sus ghettos rurales (y hasta cierto nivel
urbanos). Proporcionarán la base económica y ultima ratio
para la ideología ficticia del 'nacionalismo' de las variedades
de los Xhosa, Zulú, Colorados, etc. Criar este tipo de clase
requiere diplomacia, tiempo y estabilidad. En este proceso hasta se
utilizará a partes del movimiento de liberación y algunos
de sus líderes carismáticos, incluso si estos tuviesen
que ser repatriados de su exilio o de la Isla de Robben" (p. 178).
(Véase: http://www.geocities.com/maymartin2001/einband.html).
Este libro fue colocado en el índice de la censura en la
Sudáfrica del Apartheid y a causa de esto, sus contenidos
explosivos no se conocían a nivel internacional; por eso,
más adelante citaremos extensamente de esa obra. Sus
advertencias son más válidas que nunca. El libro
además indica, cuales son los errores que cualquier movimiento
revolucionario debería evitar a toda costa.
En cuanto a lo anteriormente expresado, la meta principal del
capitalismo mundial en Sudáfrica, es decir, crear una clase
media capitalista negra, la asumió el ANC religiosamente. La
verdad del asunto es, que Mandela y su ANC nunca eran y todavía
no son anti-capitalistas, como se puede ver en su programa principal,
que es la "Carta de la Libertad" de 1955; durante toda su trayectoria,
su ambición fue la de conquistar la oportunidad para los
"Negros" de convertirse en capitalistas. No eran, ni son
revolucionarios, máximo son reformistas sociales, que ni
siquiera cumplen con sus promesas. Mandela mismo confirmó que el
programa del ANC es establecer una democracia burguesa dentro del orden
global corporativo capitalista actual y así mantener el sistema
capitalista en Sudáfrica. Esto es precisamente lo que el actual
gobierno sudafricano ha logrado.
Así que la Revolución Sudafricana está pospuesta
para mejores tiempos. Tenemos que estudiar al capitalismo muy
cuidadosamente
aquí en América Latina, para no caer en el mismo cenagal
de Sudáfrica.
Hace décadas, advertí:
"La situación social, política, económica e
internacional ha cambiado significativamente desde 1960. Ahora
más que nunca es cierto, que ni la clase dominante de los
colonos blancos ni el capital internacional se despedirán
pacíficamente de su existencia de zánganos. Ellos
defenderán sus riquezas, privilegios y ganancias por la fuerza
mayor, como lo hicieron antes. Los Africanos oprimidos sólo
podrán obtener su libertad a través de la
contra-violencia emancipatoria" (p. 168-169).
Esto ciertamente es válido para la Revolución
Bolivariana. Una y otra vez, la "oposición" oligárquica y
la administración de Washington, intentarán de tumbar el
gobierno bolivariano a través de todo tipo de medios violentos
"democráticos". Además, explicábamos que las
"guarimbas", el "sabotaje", el "liberalismo", el cristianismo y el
"Gandhismo" no liberarán a los millones de "Negros" que
están sufriendo bajo el capitalismo global y el terror
imperialista globalizado en Sudáfrica:
"Sin embargo, en vista del poder masivo del Estado presente, una guerra
convencional o el tipo de guerra de guerrillas que se ha venido
practicando en Sudáfrica hasta la fecha, no ofrecerán
ningún
chance de éxito. Más bien tienen que apoderarse del poder
político y económico por medio de una teoría
revolucionaria
propia y una práxis guerrillera adaptada a la situación
sudafricana. Esto implica una planificación y
coordinación a largo plazo. En consecuencia, la primera tarea de
un partido revolucionario proletario tiene que ser la de encontrar
métodos de formación de cuadros en las áreas
claves, por ejemplo en los centros industriales y
de minería. Esos tienen que ser tan móviles como los
migrantes africanos mismos: 9 meses en la ciudad y 3 meses en las
reservas laborales conocidos como Bantustans. Todos los eventos
cruciales en la vida de un
Africano ocurren en su sitio de trabajo - obviamente ubicado en la
Sudáfrica blanca - que de esta manera se vuelve co-extensa con
su área de
actividad política" (ibid.).
Mucho de esto, en forma embrionaria, ya se ha cumplido en Venezuela. En
cuanto a las fuerzas "paramilitares" y la "Policía
Metropolitana", yo describí el arma principal de la
emancipación de la siguiente manera:
"Su arma revolucionaria más poderosa es su capacidad creativa y
productiva. Aparte de esto, claro que sí, también se
necesitan aquellas armas, que lo habilitan para poner resistencia
efectiva a las fuerzas policíacas paramilitares. Por esto, el
problema del entrenamiento militar dentro del país y el
armamento de los combatientes en el momento decisivo tienen que ser
resueltos por el partido marxista" (ibid.).
En cuanto a la Revolución Sudafricana misma, comenté:
"Hay muchos indicios que Sudáfrica se encuentra en una fase
pre-revolucionaria, aunque esto no necesariamente significa que el
combate final está justo en la vuelta de la esquina. Una
situación revolucionaria requiere ciertos factores
históricos e internacionales. Un análisis detallado de lo
qué estos factores son y si de todos modos existen en
Sudáfrica, excedería el alcance de este
libro. Hemos visto a cada rato que hay forzadas razones para el cambio
social,
tanto de carácter objetivo como subjetivo" (ibid., p. 165).
En cuanto a la construcción de un partido revolucionario, es
decir, de la vanguardia de la revolución social, o sea, de ser
"ni marxista, ni anti-marxista", comenté:
"Los revolucionarios sudafricanos no pueden y no deben perder el
contacto con una situación tan altamente explosiva, aunque en la
actualidad sólo se puede percibir en latencia. Un partido
revolucionario no tiene que ser marxista por definición. En este
contexto basta de mencionar el núcleo original del movimiento
guerrillero de Fidel Castro
y el PAIGC de Africa del Oeste (Partido Africano de la Independencia de
Guinea y Cabo Verde). Cuando un partido realmente representa las
necesidades e intereses de los oprimidos, necesariamente tiene que
cambiar su rumbo hacia
un marxismo revolucionario en el curso de una lucha armada" (p. 166).
Criminalidad y Genocidio
Sudáfrica es el paradigma para demostrar que dentro del sistema
mundial capitalista, dentro de la democracia corporativa, no hay chance
de liberación alguna; al contrario, aplicando las medidas del
Banco Mundial, del Fondo Monetario Internacional, del ALCA, del
"neoliberalismo", del reformismo "revolucionario", de la democracia
"reconciliadora", del "diálogo con Zombis", las clases oprimidas
del "Tercer Mundo" están cavando sus propias tumbas.
Finalmente, vamos a resaltar uno de los resultados más horribles
de una "Revolución Traicionada", de un reformismo
político: la criminalidad y el genocidio.
Como es obvio en el caso de Venezuela, deberíamos ser muy
cuidadosos con los informes y estadísticas de las "Naciones
Unidas", del "Banco Mundial", de "Human Rights Watch", de
"Amnistía Internacional", "Genocide Watch", etc. ... aunque a
veces, leyendo entre líneas, sí nos dan una
impresión de lo que realmente ocurre en el mundo.
Después de las masacres en Ruanda, debido a la obsolencia del
trabajo manual, billones de trabajadores están en peligro de
extinción, de ser aniquilados por la maquinaria del terror
globalizado. Lo que el sistema ya no puede explotar más,
sencillamente lo bota. Eso fue lo que pasó con Mobutu, Pinochet,
Bin Laden, Hussein y los Boers en Sudáfrica - todos se
convirtieron en presa libre para cualquier "escuadron de la muerte",
mercenario o maniático sanguinario. Históricamente, los
Boers, la antigua clase dominante de Sudáfrica, habían
saboreado los frutos amargos del imperialismo británico durante
las "guerras de los Boers", donde fueron masacrados como moscas, ahora
el gobierno sudafricano de Thabo Mbeki se hace de la vista gorda ante
el futuro "negro" de los "Blancos" en Sudáfrica.
Aparte de sus propios comentarios "racistas", hace 6 meses
atrás, un "cura" pro-blanco nos reportó lo siguiente de
la Sudáfrica actual:
"Diariamente ocurren muertes por causa de tortura increíblemente
horrorizantes en las zonas rurales de Sudáfrica, escribe "New
Zimbabwe", aún, los medios del Occidente casi no dicen nada
sobre esto, mientras lamentan eternamente la muerte de un negro
drogadicto durante un ataque policíaco en Cincinnatti.
'Campesinos sudafricanos y sus familias son masacrados. Los asesinatos
son acompañados por tortura y violación. El sadismo de
los ataques sugiere o una perversión oscura o terror
sistemático. Dr. Gregory Stanton de "Genocide Watch" incluso
propuso de clasificar los asesinatos como genocidio'".
(Véase: http://southafrica.indymedia.org/news/2003/12/4973_comment.php)
Stanton comenta además:
"En Sudáfrica, en los 9 años siguientes al Apartheid y al
'milagro' de las elecciones democráticas sudafricanas de 1994,
más de 1000 campesinos fueron asesinados. La tasa mortal para
los campesinos sudafricanos se ubica en 313 de cada 100.000,
quizás la más alta para cualquier grupo de personas en la
tierra sin estar en guerra".
Lo siguiente indica, por qué debemos tener mucho cuidado con
nuestro concepto de "Revolución":
"'Existen dos teorías contrarias. Por un extremo, esos ataques
se consideran dirigidos como parte de la "Segunda Revolución".
La Primera Revolución fue la toma de Sudáfrica por parte
de un gobierno negro. La Segunda Revolución, utilizando el
terror,
es la instalación de una sociedad negra comunista radical y la
expulsión de los blancos. Echando los campesinos blancos de sus
tierras es parte
de este proceso. Por el otro extremo, se consideran los ataques
meramente
criminales y sin motivos ni liderazgo políticos. La
organización
("lobby") de campesinos blancos tiende a creer en lo primero;
señala
a Peter Mokaba, un joven y renombrado político del ANC, que
gritaba
'¡Maten al Boer, maten al campesino blanco!' delante de unas
multitudes
de negros dando gritos de alegría. El gobierno del ANC dice que
cree
en lo último".
Para finalizar, no es necesario de resaltar esta cruel realidad con
más detalles. Como dicen los Africanos: Sin fuego no hay humo.
Lo vimos viniendo y advertimos sobre los resultados horrorosos de una
revolución social en Sudáfrica y su posible fracaso:
"La violencia, inhumanidad y crueldad perpetrados por los amos
coloniales blancos contra el pueblo sudafricano, han acumulado en este
último tal grado de agresiones, rabia y sed de venganza, que una
revolución inicialmente comprendida como lucha de clase,
podía degenerar fácilmente en una guerra de razas,
preñada de catástrofes. Por eso será una de las
tareas más difíciles para un partido revolucionario
sudafricano, diseñar su programa de ilustración
política de tal manera, que impida, que la lucha de razas en
Sudáfrica reemplace la lucha de clases y que garantiza su
interconexión dialéctica.
"Sin embargo, será imposible borrar de la conciencia de los
Africanos - aparte de la dignidad humana diariamente pisoteada - los
asesinatos que alcanzan los cientos de miles, el terror, las torturas
por el régimen del Apartheid, las ejecuciones y expulsiones, las
muertes innumerosas de bebés debido a la desnutrición y
falta de atención médica, y la existencia arruinada tanto
psíquica como física de miles, lo cual todo conforma la
historia de Sudáfrica. Vamos a
esperar que la revolución seguirá probando que el
colonialismo en alianza con el capitalismo y sus respectivas
instituciones son responsables para esos gigantescos crímenes.
Este camino de la historia en Sudáfrica lo escogieron los amos
blancos y el capital" (p. 168-169).
Gobierno
no dialogará con empresarios tira piedras
Por:
Venpres
Publicado el Jueves, 09/09/04 03:05am |
|
||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
El
referéndum trajo la "revolución" con mezcla del libre
mercado y asistencia social
Por: Reed
Lindsay - The Toronto Star
Publicado el Jueves, 09/09/04 03:03am |
|
||||||||
![]() |
Hacia la
profundización de la participación protagónica (I)
Por:
www.gobiernoenlinea.gov.ve
Publicado el Miércoles, 08/09/04 11:47pm |
|
||||||||
![]() |
“El pueblo es sabio y
paciente, es el decir de los viejos”…
(Alí Primera)
El refrán popular que reza: “A caminar se aprende caminando”, encierra una sabiduría milenaria que enseña en pocas palabras la actitud necesaria a asumir ante los retos que se presentan.
Esa sabiduría pertenece y es practicada por el pueblo bolivariano, el cual, dando ejemplo de civismo y cultura democrática, ha ejercido la participación protagónica en diversas situaciones:
El cantor del pueblo venezolano, Alí Primera, interpretó en su canto el sentir popular aludiendo a su sabiduría y paciencia. Estos procesos y eventos señalados como ejercicios de la participación protagónica del pueblo, se han desarrollado en medio de la reacción fascista a los cambios legítimos y necesarios impulsados por las mayorías sociales, y ello ha requerido del pueblo bolivariano sabiduría y paciencia, mientras transita el proceso de aprender haciendo.
Un nuevo reto: La Revolución dentro de la Revolución
La realización del Referendo Popular que ratificó al Gobierno Nacional y, más allá y esencialmente, al Proceso Social Bolivariano, inicia una nueva etapa de consolidación de la Revolución Bolivariana, que conlleva a su extensión y profundización en todos los espacios sociales.
Para emprender dicha consolidación es preciso enfrentar dos retos:
· Seguir conjurando los riesgos que entraña la reacción fascista.· Mirar hacia adentro del proceso revolucionario, desde un enfoque autocrítico.
Para el primer reto, la experiencia acumulada por el pueblo en su lucha antifascista le imprime una mayor fortaleza, en momentos en que desesperan los grupos reaccionarios, tras una historia reciente de seis años de derrotas y el agotamiento de sus diferentes estrategias desestabilizadoras y golpistas. En ese nuevo escenario, una vez más, la alianza estratégica Pueblo-Fuerza Armada enfrenta las amenazas a la democracia y a la paz.
Respecto al segundo reto, es cada vez más evidente el interés y la voluntad de las filas revolucionarias por evitar los vicios y distorsiones que obstruyan la participación protagónica. Las críticas a las estructuras estatales y a la gestión pública apuntan principalmente a la persistencia de vicios y distorsiones que constituyen una pesada herencia de la IV República y, particularmente, de su período puntofijista, que durante 40 años sembró una mentalidad proclive a legitimar el individualismo, la corrupción, la desigualdad, la exclusión, la competitividad, el clientelismo, el paternalismo, el centralismo, la dependencia y muchos otros males. El retos es entonces ampliar y profundizar la praxis de la Democracia Participativa y Protagónica, para, por ejemplo:
Para superar esas estructuras institucionales y mentales que determinan una manera de hacer es preciso comprender que:
1. Los cambios institucionales no se decretan, los construye la gente.2. Los cambios de mentalidad tampoco se decretan, se construyen procesualmente.3. Lo primero y lo segundo pasa por la construcción de una nueva ciudadanía revolucionaria.
Ejercicio de la Ciudadanía Revolucionaria
La participación protagónica en el proceso de cambios tiene fines (contemplados en la Constitución Nacional y en el Plan de Desarrollo Económico y Social de la Nación) y medios (la participación protagónica y la corresponsabilidad Estado-sociedad, donde el Estado no es una instancia de poder separada de la gente sino expresión de su voluntad mayoritaria). Esto implica que la estructura institucional debe adecuar coherentemente la consecución de los fines con los medios establecidos en la Constitución: La participación protagónica y la corresponsabilidad.
El mayor reto es entonces seguir creando las condiciones que posibilitan construir la ciudadanía participativa y protagónica que hace de la persona y la comunidad sujetos y no objetos del cambio social:
Parte de este proceso de construcción de la nueva ciudadanía revolucionaria, participativa y protagónica, es conocer y activar en todas las esferas los mecanismos de participación contemplados en la Constitución Bolivariana, los cuales serán abordados en la segunda parte de este análisis.
Venezuela: Divisions
Harden after Chávez Victory
By: Bart Jones - National Catholic Reporter Oscar Rodríguez had left his new part-time home of West Palm Beach, Fla., and was on an airplane headed for his homeland, Venezuela, with an urgent mission: to vote President Hugo Chávez out of office in a recall referendum. The owner of a chain of furniture stores in Venezuela, Rodríguez believed the leftist firebrand Chávez was destroying the country. In the last two years, Rodríguez shut down 20 of his 50 stores, and then moved his wife and two daughters to Florida because he feared for their safety. Now he commutes between the two countries every week. “I can’t sleep at night because it’s a do-or-die situation,” said Rodríguez, 39, a self-described member of the Venezuelan oligarchy Chávez loves to lambaste. “What he wants for Venezuela is another Cuba.” The next day, a line of men and women were standing on Avenida Urdaneta in Caracas a block away from the Miraflores presidential palace. They were waiting to buy chickens sold by Chávez’s government at cut-rate prices. Workers were passing the bags of poultry down from the back of a truck to a crowd that adores Chávez as much as Rodríguez despises him. “In the entire history of Venezuela the best thing that has happened is this government,” said Gregoria Vina, 43, a lawyer who lives in the working-class neighborhood of La Pastora. “Before I used to buy one chicken. Now I buy three.” Venezuela is the most polarized nation in Latin America today, split between those who view Chávez as a dangerous demagogue who wants to impose a Fidel Castro-style communist regime and those who see him as a hero to the poor masses who is carrying out the most radical social transformation in Latin America since at least the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua in the early 1980s. The Aug. 15 recall referendum, billed by some as the first in the world against a democratically elected president, was supposed to provide a democratic solution to a standoff that has included a failed coup attempt, an illegal two-month shutdown of the country’s massive oil industry and a series of huge street protests. Chávez won the vote in a landslide and amid a record turnout, with some lines stretching a mile long and people waiting up to 11 hours to cast their ballots. But the referendum has not resolved the country’s tensions and in ways left it worse off and more polarized, according to observers. Even though Jimmy Carter and his Carter Center along with the Organization of American States certified the vote as free and fair, the opposition leadership is alleging fraud and claiming Chávez stole his victory -- despite winning by a 59 percent to 41 percent margin, or by 1.7 million votes out of 9.5 million cast. Even the Bush administration, which is hostile to Chávez, acknowledged he won fairly. Belief in fraud widespread Yet the conviction that Chávez stole the election is widespread among Venezuela’s small middle and upper classes. “What he did is a fraud,” said Luisa Victoria Arana, 65, a housewife in Caracas’ middle-class Las Colinas de Bello Monte neighborhood. Carter “is a bandit. We don’t want anything to do with Carter.” Some analysts contend a type of “collective neurosis” or “hysteria” has overtaken large segments of the opposition who refuse to recognize they lost -- and lost big. “They can’t see the reality,” said Margarita López Maya, a sociologist at the Central University of Venezuela. “There is a mental block. … It’s almost a pathology.” To the outside world, the refusal of the opposition leadership to acknowledge the results is creating the perception that “they are a bunch of crazy people,” said Jesuit priest Arturo Peraza, a human rights lawyer and a Chávez critic. He compared them to an 8-year-old child who throws a tantrum when he doesn’t get his way. “All the credibility they had they’ve thrown away. It’s an act of suicide.” The Venezuelan opposition’s conviction that Chávez stole the election was fueled in part by exit polls conducted by a U.S. firm in conjunction with Sumate (Join Up), a Venezuelan group that helped lead the drive for the recall referendum. Sumate is the recipient of a $53,400 grant from the National Endowment for Democracy, a U.S. Congress-funded entity that has come under fire from Chávez for pumping $1 million a year into opposition groups. The exit poll, conducted by Sumate volunteers, showed Chávez losing by 18 percent, when in reality the exact opposite was true. Word of the poll spread quickly by cell phone during the afternoon. Then, four hours before polls finally closed around midnight, New York-based Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates sent out a news release by fax and e-mail declaring, “Exit poll results show major defeat for Chávez.” Venezuelan authorities had prohibited the release of any exit poll results before official results were announced. Sumate “deliberately distributed this erroneous exit poll data in order to build up, not only the expectation of victory, but also to influence the people still standing in line,” Carter said later. Sumate and Penn Associates insist their poll was accurate, and that the Chávez government committed massive fraud. Anti-Chávez television Beyond that, throughout the day Venezuela’s rabidly anti-Chávez television stations showed long lines of people voting in affluent anti-Chávez districts, but none of the long lines in Caracas’s vast slums. Teodoro Petkoff, a former ’60s guerrilla leader and a prominent Chávez critic, says he called the owner of one station to urge him to send camera crews to the slums in the interest of fair and balanced coverage. Petkoff said the owner refused. It all led to shock and disbelief when electoral authorities announced on national television at 4 a.m. on Aug. 16 that Chávez had won in a landslide. In less than an hour, opposition leaders appeared on television themselves, declaring the vote a fraud. The opposition’s stance has hardened divisions in the country and created a scenario where extremist right-wing sectors might use the vote as an excuse to resort to violence, Peraza said. The fraud allegations “are an invitation to radical groups to become more empowered,” he said. “That scares me.” Peraza also was worried before the vote that if Chávez lost, some of his extremist supporters would react violently. Peraza’s worst nightmare is Chávez’s assassination, setting off a social uprising similar to “El Bogotazo” in Colombia in 1948 when popular Liberal party leader Jorge Eliecer Gaitan was assassinated and three days of bloody riots broke out. A brutal civil war ensued and still rages today. Chávez’s victory in the referendum was spurred largely by a series of “missions” he has launched in the last year or so to carry out his vision of a radical redistribution of Venezuela’s oil income from a wealthy ruling elite he accuses of pillaging the country to the masses of slum dwellers and peasants that experts estimate account for up to 80 percent of the population. The programs range from a literacy project called Mission Robinson that has taught 1.2 million people to read and write, to subsidized supermarkets that sell beans, flour and rice at cheap prices. One of the most popular programs, Barrio Adentro (Inside the Neighborhood), has dispatched 13,500 Cuban doctors, dentists and optometrists to slums where they live and provide free 24-hour medical attention in blighted areas where such a concept is astonishing to most residents. This year alone Chávez is pumping at least $1.7 billion in revenue from skyrocketing oil prices into health and education programs. Critics say he bought votes for the referendum. Supporters say it is simply pork-barrel politics U.S.-style, and the first time a Venezuelan president has paid serious attention to the poor masses. Leftist vindication His backers see Chávez’s victory as vindication of a movement that is rising across Latin America as a backlash to free-market, “neo-liberal” economic programs endorsed by the United States and also known as the “Washington Consensus.” Leftists have won the presidencies of Brazil with Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and of Argentina with Nestor Kircher. Indigenous leader Evo Morales nearly won the presidency in Bolivia in 2002. Yet to his detractors, Chávez is nothing more than a messianic demagogue in the tradition of Argentine caudillo or strongman Juan Perón, offering short-term gratification to the poor masses through programs that are poorly run and will collapse when the oil money runs out. Peraza and fellow Jesuit Jose Virtuoso believe Chávez has failed to attack the major systemic problems plaguing Venezuela such as a corrupt judicial system, one of the most bloated government bureaucracies in Latin America, and rising crime and poverty rates. An often-cited study by the Jesuit-run Andres Bello Catholic University in Caracas says poverty and critical poverty have leaped by nearly 20 percent each, to 74 percent and 40 percent of the population, during Chávez’s five years in power. Economist Robert Bottome says the bolivar has lost 71 percent of its value since 1999, while accumulated inflation is 187 percent. Former Caracas police chief Ivan Simonovis states that Caracas suffered 25,000 homicides in the last five years. “The government of Chávez has been a bad government,” said Virtuoso, a political scientist at the Jesuit-run think tank Centro Gumilla. Chávez’s defects go beyond bad government, though, according to some critics who contend he is authoritarian or even imposing a communist dictatorship in Venezuela modeled after his friend Fidel Castro. They say Chávez is packing the Supreme Court with allies, intimidating the news media and seizing control of the state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela, one of the top four suppliers of oil to the United States. “Of course he’s a communist,” said Rodríguez, the businessman who now lives part-time in West Palm Beach. But to Chávez’s supporters, the accusations are driven by one basic fact: The poor have taken power in Venezuela for the first time in the country’s history, and the moneyed classes who live in gated mansions and travel to Miami for weekend shopping excursions don’t like it. “For the affluent sectors of the country the problem is not that there is poverty,” said Edgardo Lander, a Harvard-educated political scientist at the Central University of Venezuela. “The problem is that the poor are organizing and mobilizing. And that signifies a threat of the ‘dangerous classes.’ The dangerous classes are dangerous if they mobilize, if they act, if they demand.” Lander likens the situation to a high-society party of “the white people, the refined people, the people who know how to speak well, who know how to hold the crystal cups to drink wine. Suddenly, into the party barge some people who don’t have manners, who are poorly dressed, who haven’t taken a bath and smell bad. They grab the food with their hands. They create the sensation they are taking over the country.” Chávez backers contend that if the economy is not doing well, it’s because the opposition has destabilized the country by launching the failed 2002 coup against Chávez, the illegal two-month oil strike in December 2002 at a cost of $10 billion, and the constant street protests. Now that the opposition has resorted to democratic means to try to oust Chávez, the economy is rebounding and is expected to lead Latin America this year with 12 percent growth. Even if the Catholic University figures are accurate, Chávez supporters assert that the missions have offset much of the economic downturn. The United Nations says life expectancy has increased under Chávez from 72.8 years to 73.7 years; infant mortality has dropped slightly and literacy has risen from 90.9 percent to 92.9 percent. Many people in the slums told NCR that they don’t feel their lives are worse under Chávez, and actually are much better. “He’s the only president who has fought for the poor,” said Rosa Gonzales, 43, who lives in a tin shack in one of the poorest barrios in Caracas, Nueva Tacagua. Many of her neighbors said they were going to vote for the first time in their lives in the referendum. Even critics who question the effectiveness of his programs acknowledge his brilliance at connecting with the poor masses. “The man speaks the language of the poor,” said Peraza. “The man touches the souls of the poor.” Like all of Venezuela, the Jesuits themselves are divided over Chávez, who grew up in a mud hut and is dark-skinned like most poor Venezuelans, in contrast to the light-skinned elite. Fr. Miguel Matos, a prominent leader of Venezuela’s popular movement in the barrios, says he believes the Chávez project, while not perfect, overall is positive. He says that in contrast to recent Venezuelan presidents who were corrupt, alcoholic or womanizers, Chávez is a role model of a teetotaling, personally honest, hard-working leader (he sleeps as little as three or four hours a night and works seven days a week). Matos adds that given Venezuela’s culture of corruption and other national idiosyncrasies such as putting recreation first and work second, any reform project will be difficult to wage and flawed from the beginning. Opponents march freely To Chávez supporters, one of the most searing and widely reported accusations about his project -- that he is installing a communist dictatorship -- is absurd. Opponents freely march by the hundreds of thousands in the streets. Critics openly call for coups on television, including some generals who declared themselves in open rebellion against Chávez during a months-long occupation of the Plaza Altamira in upscale Altamira. None of them or the leaders of the 2002 coup or the leaders of the oil strike went to jail. “What would happen in the United States if a group of active generals in the army organized a coup against the president of the republic?” asked Lander. “Would they have been let free as if nothing happened?” “Can you imagine that in the United States a group of active generals install themselves in a plaza and declare themselves in disobedience to the president of the United States and this goes on for months and nothing happens?” Even some of Chávez’s fiercest critics who are concerned about his autocratic tendencies concede that allegations that he is installing a Cuba-type dictatorship are far-fetched. “This is not a dictatorship,” said Petkoff, the former guerrilla leader. “It’s a country with a president who is authoritarian, personalist, a caudillo, but in the end a democratic country.” Yet Petkoff contends Chávez has made a major strategic blunder by flaunting his friendship with Castro, inciting mass panic in the moneyed classes that he plans to install a communist dictatorship even though he has no plans -- or capacity -- to do so, since the country would never accept it. The dictatorship allegation is a prominent theme in both Venezuelan and international news accounts of Chávez. “It’s an irony that he has created all these fears with threats he hasn’t carried out,” Petkoff said. He added that Chávez also has frightened and alienated the wealthy with his constant attacks, calling them “squalid ones” and a “rancid oligarchy.” Petkoff doesn’t know if Chávez can reverse his sour relations with the elites and achieve a peaceful coexistence. He and other analysts believe Chávez should reach out to them after his victory and seek some form of dialogue and reconciliation, including with sectors such as the business community that are showing signs of accepting his triumph as valid. They say Chávez must realize that 40 percent of the population opposes him and his project, take them into account, tone down the anti-oligarch rhetoric, drop his autocratic tendencies and do a better job of listening to people who disagree with him. Need to admit they lost For its part, the opposition needs to recognize the reality that they lost overwhelmingly in the referendum, and that they are not the majority in the country. Many analysts believe the opposition also must renounce unconstitutional actions, commit itself to playing by democratic rules of the game, drop its wild accusations of a communist dictatorship, find new leadership and realize the poor majority can no longer be ignored. National healing in Venezuela must include a commitment by the fiercely anti-Chávez and elite-controlled media -- which many say have turned into political parties -- to return to ethical journalism and present both sides of the Chávez story, analysts contend. “The media has created an irrational hatred” of Chávez with its 24-hours-a-day bombardment of harsh, mocking and often false attacks, said Matos. Critics such as Lander and Mark Weisbrot of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington believe the international media has followed suit, sending around the world a distorted image of Chávez as a dictator and a monster and ignoring or downplaying the story of why he enjoys widespread support. Before the referendum most of the media reported that the vote was too close to call, even though many independent observers, pollsters and even Wall Street analysts were predicting a Chávez win. The international media “is presenting day after day grotesque distortions of what is happening in Venezuela,” Lander said. What seems clear in the wake of Chávez’s stunning victory is that there will be no fundamental retreat in his “Bolivarian Revolution.” As he stood on the second-floor balcony of Miraflores Palace as dawn neared Aug. 16, he addressed a throng of cheering supporters after his triumph -- his eighth at the polls since 1998 and one of his most important. “Venezuela has changed forever. There is no turning back,” Chávez said. “The country will never return to that false democracy of the past where elites ruled.” Bart Jones is a reporter for Newsday and a former foreign correspondent for The Associated Press in Venezuela. Sidebar:
National Catholic Reporter, September 3, 2004 Editorial The essential lesson of Chávez President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela is not an angel. Neither is he the tyrant and dictator that some have tried to paint him. The most recent event in his tumultuous political career -- an overwhelming victory over opponents who tried to oust him in a recall vote -- certainly validates the view that he has won the hearts of a majority of Venezuelans. As writer Bart Jones said in a personal assessment after reporting on the election for NCR, “Poor people have risen up and taken power in Venezuela. That’s the essential lesson of Chávez, whether he’s a good president or a bad president.” Serious questions remain, not least among them whether Venezuela can overcome the deep divisions resulting from the battles around Chávez and whether the elite in Venezuelan society will be able to accept the new political power of the poor in that society. Some detractors of Chávez -- and they are many, ranging across the spectrum of thinkers and observers -- claim that his dispersal of oil revenues for education and health care is a short-term solution to long-standing and deep problems. If the oil money dries up or if Chávez decides to do an about-face on his commitment to helping the poor, that criticism may prove correct. But even if it is short-lived, what is wrong with poor people becoming literate and gaining access to health care? How could they not be better off, in even some minimal way, in the long run? As Venezuelan political scientist Edgardo Lander remarked to NCR about Chávez’s use of oil revenues to improve conditions of the poorest sectors of the country: “Why is that populist? Why isn’t that a state fulfilling its responsibility?” We think the Chávez victory will give added legitimacy to similar impulses evident in Bolivia, Brazil, El Salvador and other Latin American countries. Leftist movements are rising throughout Latin America as a reaction against the failed “free market revolution” instituted more than a decade ago and backed by the United States, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and others. Leaders like Chávez, who threaten the status quo and pay more than lip service to the masses of desperately poor in Latin America, have little connection with the Bush administration. In fact, this administration has been hostile toward Chávez and has used the previously little-known National Endowment for Democracy to fund opposition to him (NCR, April 2). It has not worked. The United States needs a new approach to Latin America, a region where it has historically backed dictators and death-squad governments. It needs to recognize that Latin America is the region with the most unequal distribution of wealth in the world, and that leaders such as Chávez are a response to that. “We are gold medalists in inequality,” Chávez told reporters three days before his victory. Chávez represents a new model to address the mass poverty in Latin America, a model that is neither communism nor capitalism but something in between. It looks something like a market economy with a refreshing sense of obligation to the least of those in society. National Catholic Reporter, September 3, 2004 Original source / relevant link: |
|||||||
![]() |
||
![]() |
Top of page | ![]() |
![]() |
||
![]() |
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1275
*************************************************************************************************************
New Documents Reveal that
USAID Provided $2.3 Million to Venezuela's Opposition in 2003
Thursday, Sep 09, 2004 | ![]() |
Print format |
![]() |
Send by email |
By: Eva Golinger - Venezuelafoia.info
New York, September 8, 2004—Documents recently obtained from the U.S. Department of State under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by www.venezuelafoia.info demonstrate that more than $5 million annually during the past two years was given by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to various organizations in Venezuela, many of which are aligned with the opposition. One of the key groups collaborating with USAID is Súmate, the organization that promoted the recall referendum campaign against President Hugo Chávez and is now rejecting the results that have been certified by the most credible international observers and even by the U.S. government. Súmate, despite its numerous undemocratic positions and actions, has also been a recipient of U.S. government funds from the National Endowment for Democracy in 2003.
However, these new documents obtained by Venezuelafoia.info have all been censored by the U.S. Government despite the use of the FOIA, which intends to ensure transparency in U.S. Government operations. The Department of State has withheld the names of the organizations receiving financing from USAID by misapplying a FOIA exemption that is intended to protect "personnel and medical files" of individuals. Such clear censorship indicates that USAID and the U.S. Government clearly have something to hide regarding their collaborations with the Venezuelan opposition. Despite USAID’s ongoing crusade to encourage transparency in foreign governments, the withholding of information that does not fall under any available exemptions clearly demonstrates a double standard applied by the U.S. Government in this case.
USAID is financed by the U.S. Congress and is controlled by the Department of State. Founded by President John F. Kennedy in 1961, USAID was established as a fund dedicated to humanitarian intervention around the world. Despite Kennedy’s humane intentions, USAID has more recently been used, in many instances, as a mechanism to promote the interests of the U.S. in strategically important countries around the world. In the case of Venezuela, USAID maintains a private contractor in Caracas monitoring and facilitating its projects and funds and also has a local operating center, the Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) that was established in 2002, after the failed coup d’etat against President Chávez. The private contractor, Development Alternatives, inc. (DAI), manages and supervises grants approved by USAID to Venezuelan organizations.
Under a program entitled Venezuela: Initiative to Build Confidence, DAI has awarded 67 grants to Venezuelan organizations in various sectors and areas of interest. These grants equal $2.3 million, just during 2003. In total, DAI ‘s program in Venezuela counts on $10,000,000 in funding for the period August 2002 through August 2004 –$5 million annually to "focus on common goals for the future of Venezuela". According to the documents obtained under FOIA and DAI’s project description (available on www.dai.com/about_dai/about_fs.htm) none of the project grants or programs have been in collaboration with the Venezuelan government.
In fact, many of the same recipients of U.S. government funds through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) have also received USAID funding through DAI. Despite the illegal withholding of names on the USAID-DAI grants, one document apparently was skipped, at least in part. The name, Súmate appears on a grant intended to encourage "electoral participation" in the recall referendum, citing $84,840 as the total grant amount. Combined with the NED grant of $53,400 given to Súmate in 2003-2004, the organization that is now crying fraud about the recall referendum against President Chávez, the results of which have been recognized as absolutely credible by the Carter Center and the U.S. Department of State, has received, at minimum, more than $200,000 in just one year for promoting its attempts to remove Venezuela’s President from office.
Other recipients of USAID funds through DAI which are apparent in the censored documents include the organization Liderazgo y Visión for its project, "Un Sueño para Venezuela", ("A Dream for Venezuela") a project created in 2002-2003 with the intent of offering an alternative vision and agenda for those opposing President Chávez’s administration. Liderazgo y Visión has also been a recipient of NED funds over the past few years. More than 6 organizations have been given funding for political and social formation and development in Petare, a poor neighborhood in the outskirts of Caracas, in the Miranda State. The work in Petare and the more than $200,000 that have been funneled into that neighborhood in the past year, appear to have been aimed at converting a community that was traditionally pro-Chávez, into one that supports the opposition. The recall referendum results from August 15, 2004 show the opposition gaining substantial numbers in Petare, and Miranda state was one of only two states in the entire nation that gave victory to the opposition in the referendum.
One grant from USAID/DAI focuses on the creation of radio and television commercials during the December 2002-February 2003 strike imposed by the opposition, during which the private media dedicated its airwaves 24-7 to opposition propaganda. One of the most striking aspects of the media’s dedication to the strike was the use of anti-Chávez commercials to indoctrinate viewers’ opinions on Venezuela’s political situation. The USAID/DAI grant shows funding originating from the U.S. government for some of these anti-Chávez commercials, collaborating with former Fedecámaras President Carlos Fernandez, who was one of the leaders of the strike, in the project.
These new documents from USAID provide evidence for a clear focus on two major projects in Venezuela: The Recall Referendum and the Formation of a National Agenda that would serve as a transitional government post-Chávez (assuming the referendum was won by the opposition).
The documents are available for public viewing on www.venezuelafoia.info
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1360 |
Many members of the latter tendency, still accusing that an election fraud took place, but still unable to offer any convincing evidence - including the controversial U.S.-funded Súmate group - seem to be entering a genuine identity crisis. "Sumate is now cautiously saying that 'the numerical patterns found in the actas do not constitute conclusive proof of fraud' (El Nacional, Aug. 23rd, page A3)," notes anti-Chávez journalist Teodoro Petkoff of the daily Tal Cual in Caracas. And yet Súmate drifts deeper into its own stormclouds, as if on autopilot, still looking for that missing proof of a "fraud" that doesn't exist.
Petkoff's own coming-to-terms with the new Venezuelan (indeed, new American) reality makes for interesting reading. Francisco Toro translated Petkoff's August 25th editorial...
What if there was no fraud? What if the results of the referendum reflect the will of the voters? Today, CANTV reaffirms, on the basis of technical arguments, what the Coordinadora Democratica had said before the referendum about the adequacy of the automated voting system. We recommend reading CANTV's statement because it leads to another question: isn't it possible that the vote remains a trustworthy democratic instrument and that refusing to use it could leave that huge mass of at least 40% of the voters without any kind of alternative vis-a-vis those in power?Clearing up this matter quickly is crucial for the immediate future, but also for the long term. We have to get past our shock, depression and anger to examine more clearly and lucidly what happened… if the results of the manual voting tables, which constitute a gigantic sample of one million of the country's poorest voters confirms the general tendency registered in the poorest areas; if OAS and the Carter Center, whose guarantees were previously said to be sufficient to accept the results, did not "rush to judgment" but instead correctly judged reality; if the exit polls, which are now thrown around as though they were Moses's Tablets, were not trustworthy enough, as expressed by one of the main pollsters in Venezuela (whose own exit polls, incidentally, had detected the trend in favor of the No from early on); if, all things considered, it does not appear to be a coincidence that all the pre-vote polls (except UCV's) had the No ahead, isn't it about time, then, to leave behind the listlessness produced by the results and to start to admit that the evidence indicates that Chavez won the referendum…?
Refusing to capitulate goes beyond mere rhetoric.
It means giving up the consoling conspiracy theories about Bush and "that old wanker" Carter, supposedly in favor of the oil interests of the empire, with the complicity of - wait for it - the Colombian oligarchy as represented by "that fucking Colombian" Gaviria; it means discarding the "pregnant bird" stories about the "Russian superprogrammer" who supposedly tampered with the machines and other such nonsense, and recognizing rather that something must have happened in these last few years in this country to allow the victory of a rhetoric of social redemption in the mouth of a strong leader who knows how to communicate it, and who despite heading one of the worse governments in recent memory, manages to hang on to the affection and the backing of millions of our fellow citizens who do not "sell" their votes but rather identify themselves still - though less and less so - with that hawker of illusions and hopes called Hugo Chavez.
For those who refuse to capitulate, digesting all of this and metabolizing it is indispensable: we need to lick our wounds, jump back into the ring, and fight.
That is the sort of discourse that sportsmanship, at the hour of a defeat, requires in an authentic democracy: to live to fight another day. I'm no fan of Petkoff, one of those professional "former leftists" who found greener pastures by throwing in with the folks that sign the advertising checks, but he's a good barometer of realpolitik and he's obviously concluded that the fraud dog don't hunt.
So what is with the other camp inside the opposition, the one that still can't admit what Petkoff, and Toro, and some others have come to terms with?
Chávez opponent Victor García Crespo has published an essay that reflects the other tendency, that which still cries fraud but laments that fewer and fewer people take its claims seriously:
For, no matter the OAS resolution, and for that matter Jimmy Carter's opinion, I strongly believe this referendum was a fraud. Perhaps, one of the biggest frauds ever committed in an electoral process. And please, do not ask me for proofs.
Did you get that, kind reader: He cries "fraud," but asks, please, don't ask him for proofs…
All that I have are indications, signs, clues and traces in a nutshell, what I offer is pure circumstantial evidence coupled with my common sense, my observation of the whole process, and the perception I had when I lined up, for more than five hours, to cast my "YES" vote by touching the screen of a voting machine, and depositing the physical evidence of my vote…
García Crespo then invents a series of knowing falsehoods that his former allies in the opposition movement have already discarded:
As the process continued, the news had already spread to different countries, for instance in New York this news was already on: "From Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, an independent New York-based polling firm, show a major victory for the 'Yes' movement, defeating Chavez in the Venezuela presidential recall referendum. The poll showed 59 percent in favor of recalling Chavez, 41 percent against." The same result was obtained by SUMATE and others serious pollsters…
When García Crespo says "the same result was obtained by SUMATE," he seems either unaware, or intentionally hiding, of the fact that the Penn, Schoen & Berland "exit poll" was the Súmate poll: They were not two different exit polls. They were the same, solitary, poll: Súmate's partisan "volunteers" did the exit polling for Penn Schoen, which then sent out an international press release, five hours before polls closed, as part of an intentional montage of disinformation.
We keep hearing talk of "other serious pollsters" who supposedly had the same result. Not one has come forward, or been cited by name, much less disclosing the methodology (the Sina Qua Non required to take any poll seriously is the disclosure of the methodology, something, interestingly, that Penn Schoen has also refused to disclose for the past two weeks: to me, that indicates the Doug Schoen has already committed some very damaging ethical and professional lapses regarding his methods, and through his childish shouts of "fraud," so that he must now duck and cover, hide and hope, that he receives no further scrutiny about his poorly conducted "exit poll")… it's simply a Big Lie that keeps getting repeated by those dwindling few who have not yet learned the sportsmanship required by democracy.
García Crespo continues muddying the waters with this statement:
This also was the proportion that existed in most of the polls before the referendum regarding the percentages of support for the opposition and government, respectively…
That claim is also demonstrably untrue, and there is a record to prove it's falsehood: The Narcosphere, and Venezuelanalysis.com, both published the various poll results prior to the referendum of which the large majority of the polls said, in advance, that Chávez was going to win. See, for example, Three New Polls Show Venezuela's Chávez Winning Recall by 11% to 25%, by Martín Sánchez and Greg Wilpert. Chávez won by 18-percent, exactly midway between those two numbers.
But I've come to a disturbing conclusion that the shouts of "fraud" by those like García Crespo and others of his tendency are simply a tactical decision by the least ethical elements of an opposition that, after all, first tried every undemocratic means (coups d'etat, lockouts of workers from their jobs, Commercial Media efforts to cause panic with disinformation, etcetera). García Crespo and his ilk know damn well there was no fraud (others, still, are saying that even if there were flaws or problems in the voting tallies - a factor that would not be surprising in any large country on earth with a national referendum or election - that it's obvious that Chávez won the vote; they simply hold out hoping against hope that maybe it the Gods should have given them a smaller margin of defeat to work with).
It is that search for "little problems" - a machine tally here that might be off… a poorly reported result from another district… - that the fraud conspiracy theorists are searching for, so far in vain. It's impressive, actually, that with so much looking for fraud by such a well-financed opposition, nothing has been found now after two whole weeks! At some point, their true friends should whisper: Hey, pal: maybe you did really lose your car keys at the bar! Stop accusing everyone else of stealing them!
The way the Commercial Media works in Venezuela is that any small or tiny problem found in a single locale is then broadcast nationwide, sensationally, as if it represents a universal truth of what happens everywhere. (Globovision, in particular, ought to feel shame and embarrassment over falling for J.J. Rendón's "rumorology" in which he claimed statistical aberrations in the results that real statisticians quickly batted down… not that the slimebuckets over at Globovision are capable of feeling shame over anything… When you've already fomented a coup d'etat, a few fibs from a professional liar sure ain't gonna change the results at the end of one's life as to whether one goes to heaven or hell.) It's that dynamic that the "pro-fraud" tendency in the opposition is looking and hoping for: one small error or flaw that it can count on the national Commercial Media to amplify as if it is a universal truth… and, yet, they can't even find or manufacture any credible such claim at that.
García Crespo, however, gives away his game in the following passage of his essay, urging the pro-fraud camp on…
The ominous aftermath of this referendum demands from the leadership of the democratic opposition to gather all the necessary information and evidence to support the claim of a fraudulent action. This will not be an easy task, but there are sufficient elements from which intelligent and expert personnel can formulate hypothesis, research into them and provide conclusions that never can dissipate the clouds of illegitimacy in the Chavista firmament…
The goal, García Crespo admits, is not to clarify the results, but, rather, it is to place "the clouds of illegitimacy" over "the Chavista firmament."
As a writer, I find his use of words interesting and revealing. He assigns to his enemy the role of "firmament" or light, and to his own side the role of making clouds to create darkness, to block the sun of democracy itself.
He's not looking for "proof" anymore: he's just looking for a saleable "hypothesis." And it's clear that those elements of the opposition who remain on the side of trying to cloud the truth are, simply put, intentionally trying to do so.
Open the window, García Crespo, get up from your computer and take a walk outside… The sun is already shining over América and Venezuela… Your wishful clouds, like your claims of fraud, have already dissipated, and real life marches on.
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2004/8/29/103726/516
************************************************************************