(en) Anarkismo.net: Anarchist communists Reflections on the Venezuelan process by Jos? Francisco Mago (ca)

One of the major issues in recent weeks contingent in the imagination of the left 
nationally, regionally and internationally has been the death of Hugo Chavez. Obviously 
quite a charismatic and eccentric - leader of the "Bolivarian revolution" - who led a 
social process, very complex, containing up to now a range of successes, contradictions 
and limitations. The different political tendencies have sympathy, have raised their 
opinions in favor of the process or were somehow positioned on this and the process behind 
it. Libertarians have not been excluded from this discussion process and a set of views 
are heard in different media is not without controversy. ---- One of the major issues in 
recent weeks contingent in the imagination of the left nationally, regionally and 
internationally has been the death of Hugo Chavez.

Obviously quite a charismatic and eccentric - leader of the "Bolivarian revolution" - who 
led a social process, very complex, containing up to now a range of successes, 
contradictions and limitations. The different political tendencies have sympathy, have 
raised their opinions in favor of the process or were somehow positioned on this and the 
process behind it. Libertarians have not been excluded from this discussion process and a 
set of views are heard in different media is not without controversy. A really difficult 
and sensitive topic to discuss from our parent libertarian and anarchist communist. On one 
hand supporting the process as a naive Moctezuma letting Hernan Cort?s-Quetzalcoatl 
confused with El Salvador, in the city of Tenochtitlan. On the other hand the Jesuits of 
libertarian communism and anarchism that neurotically repeated rosaries are 
decontextualized in light of history. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the debate 
from the perspective of anarcho-communist and social anarchism to encourage discourse and 
ideological rearmament libertarian tendencies within the working class and the reality of 
the class struggle, national, regional and internationally.

The social process that develops in Venezuela must be analyzed - in my opinion - from a 
historical materialist perspective What does this mean? It is necessary to analyze a 
process dialectically and contradictions, which is an exercise that benefits the workers 
discusivo reset and libertarians on the continent. Socialism and its various expressions 
have been given in our recent history and Venezuelans have put on the agenda in our 
region. This does not mean that socialism can not be subjected to an analysis, a critique 
and taking a political position in relation to their expressions in the international 
class struggle. Not to have an opinion from our notions anarcho-communists have a skewed 
view of ideology as hinted several pragmatic. Rather, as libertarians can contribute not 
only to what is happening in Venezuela but to what comes in other African countries.

In Venezuela and in any country where they have radicalized social processes must "analyze 
the degree of transformation of quantitative into qualitative changes, the emergence of 
the gradual, changes through jumps, the denial of the initial development and the negation 
of that negation, repetition, on a higher plane, of certain aspects and features of the 
initial state "(Osvaldo Sunkel," The Latin American underdevelopment and underdevelopment 
theory "). It is in this way, recognizing that there may be many more, we can understand 
if the Bolivarian process is a revolution or is possible to project a set of elements 
changes by leaps and revolutionaries.

The degrees of transformation

To the sound of the parliamentary elections, Chavez could address the government of the 
Republic of Venezuela with 56.2% of the votes on December 6, 1998. What at one time seemed 
the "repetition" of social contrast to bourgeois neoliberal institutionalism was going to 
show some changes. Began, gradually, to cause some economic and institutional changes that 
will result in an offensive of neoliberalism in the region, but not capitalism. Why not 
capitalism? For the simple reason that not yet a social revolution erupts with such 
degrees of content and forms of struggle, they have made great leaps in this century. We 
have not had the privilege of watching or star in such degrees of change for now, but as 
the Venezuelan processes give us the run-up to project more radical new processes that 
could explode. In Venezuela we have seen gradual processes that have resulted in mixed 
economies, institutional reforms and rearmament of the movement of workers and popular 
movement organizations. It's a new world order stage post-Berlin Wall fell where socialism 
comes into the scene of the debate. And therefore their analysis in regard to their form 
of construction is essential.

These gradual changes have been a hint of danger to imperialism, what we observe when the 
ultra-right American and the U.S. got together November 17, 2010 at the summit "Danger in 
the Andes" to discuss the dangers of American and processes Venezuela special. This is a 
history and shows that the Venezuelan process worries right and imperialist presence in 
our continent.

The transformations in Venezuela would be interesting to analyze them through the same 
conceptions of political actors in the process. With respect to the "revolution" Chavez 
commented on the tasks of the Bolivarian project was:

"A program of transition to socialism and radicalization of participatory democracy. We 
start from the principle that accelerate the transition necessarily involves, redundant, 
accelerate the process of devolution of power to the people. The lively, effective and 
full exercise of people's power is irreplaceable leading enabler for the XXI Century 
Bolivarian Socialism .... The pattern of socialist gains measurement is: to what extent 
the measures and policies adopted actively contribute to the establishment and 
consolidation well established in a substantially democratic, social and self-control 
general "(Aram Aharonian, http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=165074).

These words spoken are very seductive to libertarians, however, were elements that were in 
contradiction with the institutional and bureaucratic corruption in government, utilities 
and the United Socialist Party of Venezuela. But nevertheless, actually make these ideas 
quantitative changes in qualitative which resulted in the development of political 
participation of workers and popular movement, but not yet a qualitative leap that 
promotes a revolutionary process beyond national sovereignty and independent national 
state imperialism. The Bolivarian project programmatic ideas although in 
contradiction-that the PSUV himself acknowledges in its strategic lines - say the following:

"El Comandante Hugo Chavez has repeatedly called for the Party, for the purposes of 
establishing a broad policy of popular participation and questioning, impulse control 
oriented popular governance at all levels. This popular interpellation policy is one of 
the main tasks of the PSUV and: recognize, organize and enable the broad social demands 
accumulated in our society, so that they are sustainable solutions in the context of the 
struggle for the construction of Bolivarian Socialism. We must recognize that this task 
has been, in many ways, neglected by the PSUV, partly pressured by circumstances of our 
political process, partly due to a wrong assessment of the relationship between the 
people, the Party and the government. A party detached from the struggles of the people 
and their demands, is a party that severely limits their ability to serve as an instrument 
motorizador of the socialist transformation of society. Thus, it is recognized as an issue 
of the highest order, as of this moment, deepen and strengthen ties between the Party and 
the masses. To consolidate these links, it is essential that the popular sectors are 
recognized in the party, ie the party can not be identified as a sort of appendage of the 
state, but as an instrument to accompany the people in their struggles and in the 
construction of Power. "(Strategic Lines of Political Action PSUV).

From this we can conclude that there is a first attempt to integrate into the world of 
the Bolivarian government workers in order to participate in the social process of 
expropriation of businesses and foster their management, executive and administrative 
tasks of the state apparatus and utilities. This phenomenon has been gradual gradually 
installed in Venezuela-is gradual, and that there is still private property and a 
strategic business conglomerate, not to mention the lack of a true dual power 
characteristic of any revolutionary process, marks a worrying precedent in the sense that 
the main political organization of Venezuela wants to develop a popular movement to 
integrate the state machinery, this conception of power strongly disagrees Bolivarian 
popular with the notion of popular power of libertarian communism (communist anarchism and 
social) as it stifles class autonomy in the state, bureaucratized the process confuses 
workers and gives the conditions for a decline of this social process - and it is 
unfortunate that "libertarian" turn a blind eye, ignoring the historical project and 
program of anarcho-communism - .

This strategy is very similar to the notion of Lenin in "State and Revolution"-yes 
removing the pinch of the dictatorship of the proletariat, is derived from a conclusion to 
overcome the bureaucracy that is wrong. From the libertarian perspective the national 
state, sovereignty and political power brutalize the proletariat and lead to defeat. The 
story is unanimous on the facts in front of these logics to operate politically as 
"libertarian Jacobin". In this last point is worth remembering the dead buried by history 
to not resuscitate.

Revolutions lose oxygen with government intervention, this should be taken as 
clear-libertarians, and political power, national sovereignty and the nation state are 
ideological and political structures that will not always be on the side of workers. And 
Venezuela is no exception, but governments and governments, which means that there are 
degrees of conflict with some and possibility of tactical agreements with others. But we 
can never support the political project of social-democratic and populist governments 
native to dry, it is always important to provide the analysis to point to a revolution and 
its tasks: making the means of production, socialist self-management, the expropriation of 
private property and public services with workers' self-management.
The social-democracies in the Third World governments were given conditions for the 
development of the labor movement and boycott imperialism, using even the most brutal 
means. We know directly the workers of Latin America and the imposition of dictatorship of 
the second half of the twentieth century were a clear sign of this. Today the new world 
scenario shows progressive governments in the "third world" in this new scenario can fall 
into confusion, because on one hand a progressive government does not necessarily 
translate into better conditions for the workers' struggle and building socialism. In fact 
progressive governments can pay for hinges antagonisms and class contradictions between 
the bourgeoisie and working class.

What libertarians think?

There are several positions that are polarized, when analyzing national problems and the 
development of progressive governments in the third world and especially for the 
"Bolivarian revolution". Examine some views on the Bolivarian process.

Libertarian Alternative France posed that "Chavez is not a new phenomenon in history. It 
is in line with the leftist and nationalist Mossadegh in Iran in 1952, the Egyptian Nasser 
in 1956, and the Libyan Gaddafi in 1977. Whenever the ambition behind the rhetoric of 
"socialist" is emerging as a true national capitalism 
"(http://alternativelibertaire.org/spip.php?article754). Indeed chavismo is nothing new in 
these points, because in history we have seen the attempt to develop national capitalisms 
that conflict with imperialism. And no denying this pued national capitalism in transition 
to a type of socialism The remoteness of the analysis of this European organization we put 
on the table the levels of popular organization and certain processes are not the carbon 
copy of progresismos twentieth century, but not going to rodeos and gives his skeptical 
position chavismo

The Uruguayan Anarchist Federation tells us that "people's pain is pain that hurts" and 
that convictions invites us to reflect with questions after giving condolences to Chavez 
and the Venezuelan workers duel: "In this town which goes on multitudinous Street in 
Venezuela's expression of pain, sense of loss of something dear. At the same time within 
the marked pain that a way forward, that was a line. So live it, feel it and say. "Our 
duty today is to continue further with socialism, the struggle of the project that the 
commander gave us" answers a reporter interviewed one step. Others say similar things and 
struggle and socialism mentioned again and again. What was this experience social 
subjectivity in the bottom? Difficult to respond quickly and less today. He lives in you 
dimension of emotion, anxiety, feeling battered. Also rebellion. That brought these winds 
so fluid, so contradictory, with both hope for broad sectors of the real underneath. Place 
where more extensive support for Hugo Chavez. What ideological elements occurred? How 
these elements are expressed in the morning near? "

Revolutionary Anarchist Organization of Venezuela, who called to vote for Chavez, has a 
very interesting reading recognizing differences: "As anarchists, we always consider 
Chavez a partner, a brother, one in our trenches of struggle. Despite our differences and 
our mutual criticism was always the unity of the people and the potential of your 
organization articulated slogans that kept our actions. These are times to continue the 
fight began on 27F 1989. These are times to claim the path of struggle for life, for 
libertarian communism, the revolution, the revolution. 
"(Http://www.anarkismo.net/article/25055)

There are contradictions in the discourse of several libertarian organizations and 
activists in relation to autonomous action, self-management and popular power in contrast 
to the State, bone the problem of political power. We must remember the origins of social 
anarchism! Workers who opposed the parliamentary political participation within the 
international I remind us who we are as a libertarian, although the pragmatic and 
revisionist blood yerba them to allege facts as "distant" in our history, but it is tail 
tread talking about national sovereignty as the Jacobins in the French Revolution. Or who 
deign to mention Bolivar Creole elite and the peasantry Latin American left wing of the 
mercantile oligarchies and landlords!

Obviously there are different positions within the libertarian world, which expresses that 
libertarian communism need greater understanding of reality and a strengthening of the 
speech to guide the working class in the class struggles worldwide. We must remember what 
we are and not be Philistines. The libertarian communists we must raise awareness of the 
popular movement and the revolutionary subject, current events show us that lack debate, 
analysis and proletarian organization that accumulates both in a new revolutionary 
subjectivity, as well as in the construction of the bodies of our class struggle for 
socialism.

Some conclusions

Libertarians, pointing to a way of building the popular movement, we call to mind our 
teachings and our conclusions to not repeat our historic defeats. Self-management and 
control of the means of production by the workers through armed struggle to expropriation 
d lso d media production class autonomy in relation to the state and its inevitable fight 
against this, direct democracy and direct action within the labor movement, the struggle 
against bureaucracy and verticality are elements of our trend and that we must not forget 
- fuck! - This set of colleagues who dare every day in implement our convictions, which 
are organized in the territories, on the fronts student unions in all expressions and 
goings of the labor movement is a force to drive on a daily basis to build a new social 
fabric, revolutionary subjectivity and organs of the working class in order to create a 
new socialism, from below and to stand up for socialism that failed. Chavez is dead and 
that's unfortunate because he loved his people, but the revolution has not yet begun and 
Venezuela lacks a truly revolutionary direction, as the PSUV is in contrast to the 
construction of a new, revolutionary socialism and socialism XXI century is not very 
different from the advanced democracies of the twentieth century. Workers may emancipate 
themselves and even more progressive governments place impediments to the working class to 
fulfill its historic tasks and revolutionary!. Workers and the Venezuelan people's 
movement have a great task ahead and dependent upon the configuration of the new arena of 
the class struggle in the continent managed to break the structures which hinder its passage.

Above the fighting!
For socialism and freedom!

http://www.anarkismo.net/article/25154