Debate: Chávez, the antimodel
Marc Saint-Upéry
To show the chavista experience as an inspiration of the left is simply an intellectual fraud. If one wants to debate about Venezuela, one better not confuse debate with half-trues and political slogans based on guided visits to the bolivarian circle of the "pomtakim commune". As an observant and an activist from more than 15 years, i am also active in the french leftist front. For these reasons i want to give my point of view.
Profited by the richness of the most abundant oil production in its history, Venezuela began a political campaign in 2003 to reduce poverty, by merits but problematic in its methods as a substance. In the last 5 years, this way to do politics faced limited managerial professionalism with the persistent problems of insecurity, inflation, lack of houses and employment. In regards to the march to "socialism", there are ideological methods that simply dont match with the ideals, like the growth of the private sector in Chávez mandate.
Moreover the confirmed dawn of the bolivarian "missions"- inyected with petrodollars every election season- instead of a serious social production articulated in a reformed state. leave all social managerial productions to be made by extra-institutionalized commando without any horizon and poorly defined, when, if not, are controlled by foreign countries in exchange of oil gifts.
There's no need to be lead by the right-wing media to understand this kind of pseudo-politics who are being feed by the twisted logic of the Venezuela petro-state and its hypocrital ideological scams. In a document of 2011, the communist party of Venezuela, allied with Chavez, showed that no only the "landlord model of capitalism is dependent and unproductive, which has dominated the country, is still active" but he also supports it. As well as not finding "any progress in the diversification of the economy", he has made Venezuela deeply dependent of it -technology and livestock in particular- the triumph of the imported parasitic bourgeoisie, the paid communist who promote the marginalized initiatives of cooperative types or "enterprises of social production" who are told to say that those social means of productions are"not that beneficial" to the country- an courteous euphemism in the view of the observable territorial disasters .
Reported failures of the hyper-presidency and the lack of total "collective direction", describes the bolivarian state as "highly inefficient", it is observed as an "intensification of corruption" and it is sad that its social progress seems to be partial and fragile, which explains that "in some case we had move back, as in the managerial organization and coordination, as well as in the basic social service loans." conclusion: "the preaching of socialism by some gubernatorial actors is fatal in their actions, and the tension generated by the growing breach its at its maximum".
With the diagnose, in the last years, a lot of political and social organizations, as well as thousands of progressive honest activists had left the bolivarian process. Right after, they were tilted as "traitors" and "imperialistic agents" by the governmental goons, furthermore, all those who left the bolivarian process have thousands of reasons to complain and protest the contradictions established by the ultra-authoritarian and systematic voice of Chávez who said :"i command total loyalty to my leadership, i am not an individual, i am the people...unity, freedom of speech but loyalty to me...everything else is treachery." (chavez 2010).
Lets wrap up. Socially, all the push redistributed in the year of 2004-2006- were incredible erratic, but with the merit of putting the social causes as the center of a political debate- which gave them total control of the governmental powers that followed a phase of failures related to the rentist state colonized by the new bourgeoisie "bolibourgouise". In the economic, there's an absurd incrementation of that parasitic model, dependent and corrupted that chavez didnt created but took it as its maximum level, a socialist propaganda generated in order to betray the people and stab them in the back by supporting total access to private properties and the de-nationalization of the 40 % of the country's oil wealth. international, everybody not knowing venezuelan politics knows that chavez lost all credibility made by his inconsistency and sterile production. the "anti imperialistic" rhetoric of the regime, with its excellent relations with the USA, reduces its effects as those who wanted a free country, or an unique currency but were the opposite and were killed by their people, like Gaddafi, or those dictators who provoke other countries, are obsessed with power and control and kill their own people like Assad, or dictators like Ahmadinejad or Lukashenko. Meanwhile, Chávez regime, now with Waduro, is dependent of Brazilian multinationals and lived under a idyll with what it was his "best friend" the Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos, a key allied of Washington.
In this field of institutionalized practices, Chávez government without a doubt isnt a dictatorship; but lets use an European comparison: in a gradient of manipulative authoritarianism that goes from Bertolusconi to Putin, he was similar in their methods and in their spirits to a regime like Viktor Orban of Hungria. Handcuffed justice, criminalization of social movements and warfare from syndicalist, arbitrary imprisonment, laboral discrimination by ideological tendency, systematic confusion between state and party, disdain for the mechanism and warranties established by their own constitution, made in 1999, tolerance when it comes to corruption made by the party elites of the chavistas so called revolutionaries and new ubber Venezuelan ruling class. At last, so much for its millitant ethics, Chávez and its regime, now with Waduro, have a hypercaudillism characterized by their criminalistics tendencies and a double standard ideology.
As its slight erosion of the 2007 electoral campaign, Chávez had a charismatic capital enough to win the elections, which now was in shambles due to the inefficiency of Waduros ignorance and arrogance. Venezuela has the right to choose their representatives without external ingerency, something that didnot happened with the Waduro campaign, who sang the Cuban national hymn, and was highly advised by them. But in conclusion, the bolivarian "model" is exactly the opposite of what a leftist would hope for.
*NdT: El Frente de Izquierda francés reúne el Partido de Izquierda (que nació de una escisión del Partido Socialista), el Partido comunista y varias corrientes independientes. Varios dirigente del Partido de Izquierda han lanzado desde hace unas semanas un campaña de apoyo incondicional y acrítico a Hugo Chávez que genera cierto malestar en algunos sectores militantes.
No comments:
Post a Comment