Venezuela - ? two weeks municipal elections of December 8 ---- A few days before the
municipal elections of December 8, the Parliament has adopted a "enabling legislation"
that will allow the new chief executive, Nicol?s Maduro, to govern by decree. Before him,
Ch?vez was used ... as well as all its predecessors. Beyond this deadline, what is the
situation in the country almost 9 months after the death of Hugo Ch?vez focused on his
person at the time the "Bolivarian" regime and the rhetoric of a pseudo-revolution but has
could count on popular support both social expectations and hopes were and are huge for a
large majority of the population. ---- However, signs of an erosion of this support is
increasing and the cult of personality that worked so well with Ch?vez is definitely down
while the pro-regime propaganda is not enough to ensure widespread acceptance.
In a context where discontent against shortages, rising inflation and corruption in
particular is beginning to be heard to the base of the Bolivarian movement, some of which
call for radical revolution, which strikes broke (university workers in the sector of the
food industry - Aceites Diana L?cteos Los Andes, Grupo Souto, Monaca ... - among
steelmakers Orinoco basin ....), where territorial struggles (indigenous lands,
agricultural seed against contamination soils and rivers, against the coal mines ...)
continue and conjure up new challenges to the "model" policy and productive, and while
unanimity before rigor within the circles of power and intermediate levels of party and
state begin to crack and dissident voices are heard.
Here, in two documents, the point of view of a Venezuelan militant libertarian on the
current situation, the crisis Chavism after Ch?vez, its future and also the challenges
that the new situation required for those who are betting the revolutionary transformation
from social movements from below and autonomy. A third article echoes a recent
intervention Maduro lambasting of steelworkers on strike ( "thugs" and
"anarcho-syndicalists populist" ), accusing them of "sabotage" , threatening prosecution
and the forcibly evict the factory they occupy.
___
"The behavior of the popular Chavism
is the key to the next election results "
For research work, a French journalist sent some questions to Rafael Uzc?tegui, member of
the collective editorial in El Libertario and author of "Venezuela: Revolution or show" on
the current situation in the country nearly nine months after the disappearance of Hugo
Ch?vez, in particular a different electoral scene which saw, according to him, away
"popular Chavism" parties and representative bodies of the "Bolivarian" movement and the
appearance of internal contradictions in the management plan .
On November 2, 2013
Nicol?s Maduro is it a continuation of Ch?vez or there he has a break?
UK: Maduro attempted to establish his legitimacy as president of the continuation of the
Bolivarian project built by Hugo Ch?vez Fr?as (HCF), both politically and symbolically. It
has taken over the government program "Patria Plan 2013-2019" with which HCF won the
elections last October and he repeats whenever he can he represents his legacy. He called
himself "the son of Ch?vez" and trying to imitate his style and ways of governing, which
he was able to capitalize politiquent short term, but which, because of its lack of
personality, will be felt the medium term. However, there are differences because policy
scene is not the same. The physical presence of HCF has been instrumental in the actions
of various political and social actors in the country between 1998 and 2012, so that its
absence alters qualitatively and politics in Venezuela.
Nicol?s Maduro suffers the consequences of a movement based on the cult of personality and
authority over all parts of the Bolivarian universe is in doubt, stimulated by the loss of
a significant number of votes in the elections dimension April last, which were the worst
election results since the Bolivarian movement there. Weak leadership Maduro has in turn
stimulated the struggle of various sectors of the Chavista, each trying to capture the
hegemony of the political legacy of Hugo Ch?vez. Unlike a living HCF when government
action was monolithic and devastating, current decisions are erratic and show different
parts of the government sometimes act in contradictory ways.
? the political crisis, coupled with the economic crisis, due to high inflation,
speculation on the black market dollars and food shortages. Whereas previously there were
different levels of compromise with the private sector, Nicol?s Maduro openly calls for
non-state economic sectors to increase food production. A third difference is that before,
HCF controlled sector of the Armed Forces. Currently, military pressure and the role they
play in maintaining governance are obvious.
With the new law "enabling" [to govern by decree], the fight against unions, can we say
that there is a shift, a change authoritarian?
UK: Nicol?s Maduro tries to hide his political weaknesses with authoritarian gestures.
While he made flexible in economic matters in dialogue with the private sector of the
economy, by facilitating access to foreign currency and the conditions for increasing
investment, it shows with a radical and uncompromising speech on politically. Maduro
trying to rely on the army, which gave a greater role in political decision-making of the
country. For these reasons, the government will militarize all social conflicts that
threaten production, under agreements with the private sector, and threaten to show the
internal weaknesses of the government. The Maduro government is the terminal phase of the
Bolivarian political hegemony, which is why so many things can happen to his remaining in
power.
Measures against insecurity are satisfactory?
RU: No, they were not under the government of HCF and are not more in the government of
Maduro. The only novelty was the militarization of interventions in the streets to fight
against insecurity, "Plan Patria". However, we all know that repression does not decrease,
but increases the structural problems that are causing urban violence and insecurity.
In addition to the unfair distribution of wealth in an oil-producing country, there is the
action of the justice system that defends the impunity for officials and condemns the
people of the popular sectors in prisons which are deposits of human beings in the worst
conditions imaginable. On the other hand, insecurity has shifted to the concerns of the
population for low wages and shortages.
Can we think that shortages and inflation will encourage the opposition to the municipal
elections of December 8th?
UK: The outcome of the next election will give quantitative information about the strength
of the Bolivarian movement in the physical absence of its leader. That is why they are
statistically significant and qualitatively different from those that took place between
1998 and 2012. Elections have become a kind of plebiscite on the popularity of the
government, so that the final battle will be for the amount of the total votes that each
sector can accumulate.
The results catalyze or retard the process of fragmentation of the Bolivarian movement. In
the case of the worst results for Maduro - be far exceeded by the total votes of the
opposition - this will open the way for a presidential referendum in three years.
Institutionally, there is no possibility of change in the short term president. However,
the opposition also suffers from a crisis of leadership. They built their policy proposal
on the basis of HCF transfer of power, and now it is gone. It is clear that they have no
proposals for the country - except their anti-Chavista - under which they can build and
maintain as new majority. One question remains: what will the voting behavior of different
parts of Chavism in the next election (vote they apply they vote sanction they abstain??).
But theoretically the economic crisis worsens the political crisis and could hold the
Bolivarian away from the pro-government vote in December.
Will he further divisions within the PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela)? From
France, I see a country that is going from bad to worse ... The left begins (finally) to
wonder if this is the right path.
UK: At this time, the infighting within the Chavista start to become visible, as we
suggested above, these battles may worsen if the December results show that Maduro
continues to significantly lose popular support. Denunciations of corruption in government
officials are beginning to spread, almost all relating to access to such preferential
dollars and speculation on the parallel market. It is obvious that these accusations are
part of the struggle between the various sectors of Bolivarism. Even some analysts Chavism
began to show their distance how to govern Maduro, and there is an intense debate on how
to deal with the economic crisis. It should be clear that regardless of what happens in
the coming months, Chavism remain a political player in the Venezuelan scene.
However, the continuation of its current hegemony depends on its fragmentation. In the
PSUV, there are divisions between the more pragmatic and more ideological sectors, the
latter being the radical promoters control the communal state and what they call the
"people power" on the rest of society . There are also levels of conflict between the PSUV
and the so-called "allied parties" as PCV, La Causa R and Redes. However, the absence of
Ch?vez and the economic crisis have removed the popular Chavism of partidaires
organizations Bolivarism. The behavior of the "popular" Chavism, which militates in any
formal organization and only had an affinity relationship with HCF is the key to electoral
victory Chavism the month of December. This sector is the most important quantitatively,
and in my case, who did not vote for Nicol?s Maduro in April.
Interview published November 2, 2013 on the website 's El Libertario
Making waves, pending storms.
Libertarian inventory for post-Chavism
Rafael Uzc?tegui
Since the death of Hugo Ch?vez, a state of confusion has gripped the country, especially
for the different political forces which, by inertia, continue to bet on the electoral
scene for the "legitimacy" of a majority vote as providential resolution of the deep
crisis that has developed among us.
What time are we? Since the death of Hugo Ch?vez 's, there is a process of change from a
one-man to that shown by the party leadership in a context marked by the fall in
popularity of the Bolivarian project power - whose most visible data are Nicol?s Maduro
votes collected by April 14, the Bolivarian worst election result in its history so far -
severe questioned addressed to the leadership of both political persuasions in competition
and an acute economic crisis. The government has Nicol?s Maduro, as the main figure to the
outside, but with authority and leadership ability are questioned within the Bolivarism.
Maduro has tried to compensate for this weakness by increasing its weight through the
Cuban leadership, while undergoing pressure from different sides of the part of senior and
middle Armed Forces Venezuelan placed in strategic positions of civilian control where
they control all goods, legal and illegal, which circulate in the territory. While the
ruling party, the PSUV, begins to be traversed by the intricacies of infighting, the
executive, without the need to promote formerly mobilizing project of "Socialism of the
XXI century" force trying to gain survival time He apparently radicalized political
discourse while building bridges with the private sector enterprises to increase food
production, trying to disable one of the main vectors of discontent shortages.
In this situation, what are the possible scenarios? We visualize two. In the first,
madurisme manages to stay in power for six years in a context of high oil prices that
allow it to inject intermittently funds in the patronage network of social missions.
Controlling institutional channels that allow the government to maintain a democratic
veneer, supported by the discipline - and corruption - Armed Forces and private sector
employers, it manages to maintain its critical distance with designations of "putchisme" ,
"sabotage" and "treason." In this scenario, the figure of Hugo Chavez show its
effectiveness as a founding myth and cohesion of a good part of Bolivarism.
However, we consider that the second scenario has the highest probability of occurrence.
In this case, Chavism knows a terminal crisis in the medium term, will end its political
hegemony in the country. The intensity of the economic crisis slows catalysis or the
implosion of the Bolivarian movement, while various trends spread denunciations of
corruption against their opponents. The most pragmatic sector Chavism partitiste establish
channels of dialogue with industry opposition to ensure its longevity in the future
administration areas of state power. Whatever the sense that the removal will Nicol?s
Maduro, the military will play a leading role, and if ungovernable encourages a sector
foment his resignation by a coup "constitutional". In this case, one that may or replace
Maduro a spokesman for the opposition - not necessarily Capriles - or a representative of
Chavism in a reshaping of political parties that have left behind coalitions GPP [Gran
Polo patriotic, government support] and MUD [Unidad Democr?tica of Mesa, right-wing
opposition] ..
Challenges, dilemmas
Those of us who think they are the grassroots social movements that transform realities,
not governments, must focus on the end of the hegemony of Bolivarism for the simple reason
that it prevents the emergence of different political identities than those dictated by
the polarization-Chavism antichavisme. In addition, this hegemony represent a continuation
and not a break, structural crisis in the country due to its statist model of a primary
export economy of energy resources.
We consider that in this period of transition to the post-Chavism, we carry out several
tasks collectively to gain influence in the medium term. In the first place, the complete
restoration of autonomy and belligerence of social movements to decide for ourselves what
are the ways to organize ourselves, what are our requirements and how we relate with other
movements on common concerns without losing the ability to self-mobilization in operable
self-managed, rejecting mediation and without putting our struggles on the electoral
process, refusing to be platforms for a political party.
This will be possible by overcoming the polarization by distancing us false
id?ologisations and working smart and bold way for the recovery of a social fabric that
evolves according to new political references and being attentive to the emergence of new
sensitivities and flexible forms of organization for action.
The challenges do not lie only in direct action, but also on the theoretical level, which
should have effects by increasing the critical mass and the ability to perform our own
diagnostics, expanding our analysis and speech capabilities and no less important in
correctly identifying the genealogy of the popular movement by an allergic historical
recovery in official discourse widowers of the Fourth and Fifth Republic.
This process of reflection should be undertaken with the necessary humility, drawing
lessons from a decade of crippling sectarianism and id?ologisations delusional,
stimulating the creation of new social initiatives concrete achievements should reach
overflow fossilization and limitations of traditional political organizations of the left
and right.
New times, new subjectivities
Infantilization rhetoric of polarized argument prevented to include in the discussion of
structural issues and the real needs and desires of large sectors of the population. We
must recover a decade and a half of stagnation and regression in the debate, integrating
fundamental issues in the region.
The first of these is the validity of the model of extractive development, despite its
social and environmental consequences, and Venezuela, as guarantor of a socio-political
culture of oil revenues. This brings us to a second question which is the common
management of the so-called "commons" - water, air, healthy environment - and the
emergence of non-state public sphere necessary. Situations of large conglomerates in
cities, including citizen security and violence, have encouraged the development of "urban
ecology", which deals with what should be the relationship between man and his urban
context, so-called "right to the city" and a quality of life with dignity. Other issues
also relate to current qu'urgentes rights called sexual minorities, and regional
integration from below.
The economic crisis is the variable contingency that threatens to trigger storms in the
country. However, the significance of any change will depend on the actions of non-aligned
in the paralyzing polarization and people depend on broader social movements, autonomous
and belligerents as a counterbalance to the influence of the Armed Forces and agreements
between the top spokespersons institutionalized policy pretending to change everything so
that nothing actually changes. Inform us, we activate and organize ourselves. Let the waves.
Maduro against strikers
"A group populist anarcho-syndicalist"
October 5, Maduro threatened strikers nationalized Sidor steelworks (Sider?rgica del
Orinoco) to evict if they do not immediately cease the strike, after processing of "thugs"
and "anarcho-syndicalists populist ". The formula has had much to please him because he
repeated at least four times in a few minutes.
"I expect an immediate or rapid rectification, otherwise we will get Sidor with all the
people of Venezuela, with the entire working class. I say it like that. I will not be weak
in the face of union thugs, anarcho-syndicalist " Maduro said in a televised speech during
a military ceremony at the Civic Campo de Carabobo.
Before the soldiers of the Bolivarian National Armed Force (FANB) and the Bolivarian
Militia, battalions of armed workers dressed in blue and red shirts, mainly from the State
companies Petr?leos de Venezuela (PDVSA) and Corpoelec, Maduro said strike is led by a
"small group" of trade unionists who "did not brought back" when Sidor was a private company.
"I want to ask for your support because strangely, in a fundamental business for the
Fatherland as is Sidor has emerged an anarcho-syndicalist and populist movement" which
calls for the State to pay a premium of individual wages equal to 80,000 dollars, the
state can not pay them. This money, "Where do we would go out? " .
Maduro, who recalled his past at the head of a union Caracas Metro, said he was now a
"worker president" and asked the Attorney General to sue the "demagogues, irrational and
populist " directing the strike. "They are trying to damage the country. (...) They have
committed a crime, but the crime does not pay " .
"I will not accept it, we can not accept it, comrades. One thing is to discuss a contract,
claim, there are tensions, differences, it is normal, there is complete freedom in
Venezuela, but another thing is that suddenly, what chance they declare the strike. There
are gringos who meddle in internal affairs of Venezuela, the ones we collect who went
there in Ciudad Guayana, walking and looking unionists Sidor. I will not say more now, but
I have many things to say. I expect the working class Sidor, without fear, she returns to
work and completely reactive production of steel and iron that Venezuela needs for the
vast Mission Housing Venezuela. " Then Maduro returns to the charge: "I bear
responsibility before the country this small anarcho-syndicalist group populist this year
if we can not deliver their homes to 300,000 poor families."
"These people believe owners Sidor, they sequester Sidor and threaten to remove the rebar"
and thus leave 300,000 poor families should receive the Habitat Mission homeless, "a crime" .
"I beg your comrades support, the support of leaders of the working class, I ask the
support of the working class, to reactivate the production of Sidor. No sabotage, not
sabotage, not anarcho-syndicalism! (...) Sidor belongs to the fatherland "
Workers had taken a first strike 15 days (September 19 to October 8) they had ended two
days earlier, after the government has finally refused to engage on wage claims, while the
direction of company, Corporaci?n Venezolana de Guayana (CVG), spoke about a possible
catch-up of 125 days.
"We had to resort back to the call for indefinite strike" , said Yunis Hern?ndez,
president of Unidad Matancera union, which integrates the current wider Unique Workers
Union Iron and Steel Industry and Similar (SUTISS).
Maduro called that individual bonuses are actually salary compensation and recoveries
related to the non-renewal of the collective agreement for over 3 years, following the
nationalization of 2008. Negotiations that led to the current conflict began in fall 2012.
For its part, Wills Rangel, chairman of the pro-government Unitaria Federaci?n de
Trabajadores Petroleros de Venezuela, who attended the ceremony, said that the working
class joined "from now on" the Bolivarian militia. Rangel assured Maduro he can count " on
this army of workers and workers' to strengthen the fight against the "economic war" .
Three days after this intervention Maduro, October 8, clashes briefly opposed to the
beginning of a general meeting of strikers and union members Suitiss a local union group
"officaliste" pro-government called Alianza Sindical (related to Central Socialistas
Bolivariana de Trabajadores de Venezuela and the Fuerza Bolivariana de Trabajadores),
opposed the strike. Two delegates SUTISS were injured. The "officialistes" PSUV activists
accompanied by outsiders, have captured a moment of places, before having to give way to
the mass of strikers present.
The first two strikes lasted 22 days between September and October in the production units
of the giant Sidor steel complex located in the eastern province of Bolivar region of
Guyana in the Orinoco basin. Discussions between the SUTISS and management have taken but
in mid-November for the third time, steelworkers were again stopped work because the
negotiations are not progressing and that management and the government seem especially
want save time, build on the union and internal divisions between different production
units and exhaust militancy of workers.
November 15, while workers are on strike handed, Maduro said steelmakers were "faignants"
and that U.S. officials had "caught two unionists Sidor to sabotage industry and leave the
country without steel " ( El Universal )
Recall
In 2008, the company Sidor, which belonged to 60% in the Argentine company Techint (via
the company Ternium), was nationalized after a conflict over two months focused on the
transformation of more than 8000 precarious contracts indefinite contract.
Ch?vez's government sends troops of the National Guard to break the strike, there are
dozens injured and many arrests, fifty cars damaged strikers, but the strike stands firm,
workers do not give. Work stoppages solidarity even place in this very industrial Guayana
region. It is finally Hugo Ch?vez himself who decided to nationalize the Group, after
rounding the Minister of Labour at the time (who was also a union leader of the
"Bolivarism" the Bolivarian Workers Force, which is one of Maduro founders), and, on May
12, moved and signed a new collective agreement with the SUTISS. At the time, workers of
Sidor were almost the hero of the working class and the nationalization presented as a
tangible sign that the regime was well "socialist" and leaned on the side of workers.
Other nationalization would follow.
November 23, Maduro, a founder of the Chavista unionism before becoming minister and
president, renewed his attacks against "anarcho-syndicalists" Sidor.
Here is the translation of an article from Correo del Caron? , regional daily Guyana,
which is echoed.
____
Maduro is returned to the charge against leaders SUTISS
A. Clavel Rangel Jim?nez
Sunday, November 24, 2013
The President of the Republic, Nicolas Maduro said that workers Sider?rgica del Orinoco
(Sidor) are "victims of anarcho-syndicalism" about the strike in the state enterprise.
From the Palace of Miraflores, during a meeting with the "workers' power" Maduro praised
the attitude of union Caracas Metro whose leaders declared, radio and television, before
being trade unionists, they were "Chavista and revolutionaries" .
"Follow the example set by subway workers" , said the president, when he appeared the
trade union movement "Chavista" with unionism "capitalist" who claims that the protest
benefits.
"The workers are victims of revendicationnistes designs (sic) and anarcho-syndicalists
(...), there is a debate in the labor movement, between capitalism and the construction of
the concept of socialism, without abandoning the struggle it takes conduct against what
hurts and against corruption, but for the first time that workers know Miraflores, there
is a government of the working class, " said Maduro.
He urged the labor movement to be consistent with the practices of President Hugo Ch?vez.
"If at some point, a fellow must obey and be another responsibility, so be it but we will
never, n ' any plan, have the luxury of losing any plans revolution " .
A question of responsibility
The President pointed out that they had created false hopes among Sidor workers telling
them they were entitled to 500,000 bolivars [58,000 euros]. "They may believe that we have
a small machine here? " Has he said. "That way it's easy" , has he added.
"Is what it is to be a leader? It is not at all be leader is being a merchant who offers a
commodity. One could also say parasite unionism, union parasites or parasite unionism.
There, a great leader summons everyone, balance of claptrap because this clause said such
a thing, such a thing, and so and they owe us 500,000 bolivars each. You believe that here
a small machine? "
He believed in the " working class " as a transforming force in history, to give
happiness to society, "one that can give happiness to the society, the working class
becoming a productive entity. This is what Karl Marx said, moving from a state of
necessity to the state of the industry " , he has said.
He then explained that unionism against the neoliberal government and against a socialist
government, it is not the same thing. "Workers are like Subway workers Corpoelec, Sidor,
the Bank of Venezuela, PDVSA, beings you the guardians of these companies belong to all
Venezuelans. Becoming socialist guards, not the capitalists guards. "
He extolled the Caracas Metro workers who are, in his opinion, "real socialist Chavez
company Metro Caracas as the property of all the people of Venezuela guards. "
Produce more
"How much did he recover Sidor costed? It took God and his help because they privatis?rent
with "enabling legislation." They sold a piece of bread in a transnational and many people
who are now coming to shout did not say anything and are fools. "
He attributed the nationalization of the steel in the process of re-nationalization that
took place in the middle of a strike in 2008, the character of President Hugo Ch?vez
assumed that "at any price" and a "fair price" the payment of transnational Ternium.
"But Sidor needs of the working class, a socialist guards. The glorious working class
Sidor must be socialist gatekeepers " and he invited them to produce more and have the
absolute guarantee "that their rights as workers, labor rights, will always be recognized
without any doubt."
The target is the SUTISS
This is the fourth time that the president is leading the charge against the union
leadership of Sidor. During the first 22-day strike, Maduro told the radio and television
that the leaders of Sindicato Unico de Trabajadores de la Industria y Sus Sider?rgica
Similares (SUTISS) had met with members of the U.S. Embassy to develop a plan conspiracy.
Then he called "anarcho-syndicalist" and this week he called "faignants" union leaders who
demand the correction of the worksheet and a new formula for the payment of premiums,
according to a document signed with CVG [Corporaci?n Venezolana de Guayana, the company
that oversees Sidior] October 8, 2013.
__
Conflict situation
Each sector of the Executive Committee SUTISS considered a proposal to resolve this
conflict. Last approved among a group of union to cancel a linear amount workers with 408
million bolivars that Sidor has in their accounts.
proposal is a response to the offer made ??by the company which refers to 120 days full
average salary for the months actually worked, three days basic salary per month,
calculated on the basis of the "perfect day of the year" for a total of 36 days.
The formula was rejected in advance by the union leadership on the ground that the clause
"perfect day" is disadvantageous compared to the current clause on current income.
This Sunday, Sidor is in its ninth day strike without there has been to date has been a
mediation by the Ministry of Labour.
____
On November 24, 2013
Television footage of the intervention Maduro against strikers "anarcho-syndicalists
populist" steel mill Sidor (Spanish)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4D2qbIxLUw
Translation: OCLibertaire
Rafael Uzc?tegui http://rafaeluzcategui.wordpress.com/
El Libertario http://periodicoellibertario.blogspot.fr/
"Venezuela: Revolution or performance" , published by Friends of Spartacus, 2011, Paris, p
272, 14 ?.. http://www.atheles.org/spartacus
Already published on this topic
Venezuela - In defense of the right to social protest!
Venezuela - Rub?n Gonz?lez released!
How Hugo Ch?vez is he came to power?
Neither will mourning nor Celebrate Time of autonomy of social struggles has arrived!
Assassination of indigenous leader Sabino Romero
http://oclibertaire.free.fr/spip.php?article1441
Home »
» (en) France Organisation Communiste Libertarie (OCL) - Courant Alternatif, CA #234 - Venezuela - Where is Chavism after Ch?vez? (fr)