Chavez - the Caudillo

by Robert Thu Aug 16, 2007 09:13

On January 31st 2007 Reuters reported that Chavez had gained extraordinary powers
to rule by 'decree'. http://www.indymedia.ie/article/80019
Blithely explained by ipsiphi and of course 'the Chav's' need for regular companionship.

One thing that was missed was the North American threat to Venezula and the CIA
ops in that country, Chavez has put the militia on guerilla warfare footing cos of
overt interference in the economy by beligerent forces. Also there were 'Al Q' threats
to the central and southern american countries and states, but they did not really
headline.

Uncle Dubya is focussing his beam on the oil potential of S America and he
has many friends down there. Dirty campaigns by N.US have decimated the
cultures and economies of the region, particularly Guatemala,Bolivia
and Granada/Columbia/Nicaragua- no need for 'foreign wars' the CIa
just rachtet up the internal probs and poverty issues.

The 18 months of extraordinary powers is not up till 08. hmmmm

by pat c Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:22

Chavez is not seeking to be president for life. No such motion is being put forward.

by interestingly Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:30

He is copperfastening his position in order, it seems to fend off the very real threat from
US black ops, hence putting the militia on war-footing.

On a tangent< >Raul Castro has indicated 'policy reforms' within the last few weeks.

However ,Chavez is not 'socialist' by any stretch of the term, and has introduced strong globalised
indicators into Venezula, coupled with a widening poverty gap and all the trappings of an elite.
Of course he's pissing off the Bush Administration.

by gurgle Thu Aug 16, 2007 17:31

US squawk! Ipsiphi squawk!

Here was your opportunity to lambast the author for not mentioning the jewel in the reforms - the creation of a sixth constitutional pillar in the form of permenant and statewide community councils, which is indeed an anarchosyndicalist notion. Hmmmmmm. But these people do know what they're talking about don't they doctor? Well alas no.

Given the choice of defending an authoritiarian who rules by decree, or criticising a muppet who lives in Barcelona who doesn't believe in Fidel or the choice of introducing readers to the wonders of the Venezuelan 5 pillar constitution and explaining the proposed 6th - what do they do?

by Pat. G. Fri Aug 17, 2007 05:58

Tis what I've long suspected about Chavez, in the long run he is nothing more than yet another in a far too long list of Dictators. He will no doubt be defended here until it is far too late. I remember the Sycophants who lauded Robert Mugabe, now the average Zim is starving, or imprisoned.

by squawk Fri Aug 17, 2007 19:45

Oh last year before the sleepless nights, constant wheeling out of a fit & healthy Fidel, the little blue book, the decrees, the banning of critical media & television - all the people of Venezuela wanted was a decent enough lovely woman they could call "mrs Chavez" the rose of Caracas.

& now here are people comparing him to Mugabe. What wonderful lives & reputations are lost for the lack of love.

information on the 6th pillar of the proposed state "community councils" -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6946013.stm

by Bolivar Sat Aug 18, 2007 13:58

Oh for god's sake would you ever stop raving and frothing at the mouth and try telling the truth. As we can see from reading the first link to the New York Times, Chavez is proposing abolishing term limits. You can argue about the pros and cons of that. The USA has term limits, a president can only be re-elected once. Other countries have the same thing, others don't. A prime minister in the UK can be re-elected again and again if the voters wish - Gordon Brown could still be PM in thirty years time in theory. The same goes for an Irish Taoiseach.

But this has nothing in common with the idea of a "president-for-life", in other words an authoritarian despot who has an iron grip on power til nature intervenes. If Venezuela does away with term limits for presidential elections, that means Chavez will still have to run for re-election every time the mandate runs out - the people will decide whether he stays in power or not. Again, you can argue whether or not this is a good thing - but stop raving about dictatorship, it's just pathetic

by mayonaise Sat Aug 18, 2007 14:11

The five pillars of the 1999 constitution are executive, legislative and judicial (like we have) and also election process and moral. The last two probably seem a bit strange to us - we rely on radio phone-ins and opinion polls for morality and have never really given much thought to our election process. Here is a link which outlines how the election pillar keeps its independence in Venezuela
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/17/america/LA-GE...e.php
Here's another article from the Guardian which mirrors a theme in the US media that the foes of Chavez are fighting back! yes indeed. http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6855419....html

For those who miss the reference to the wifey thing and the sleepless nights here's an explanatory comment when "the man"'s private life came up for much good natured discussion in both his own party and general Latin American circles. http://www.indymedia.ie/article/80019?&condense_comment...82161

by Widgets Sat Aug 18, 2007 14:22

The sixth pillar seems interesting, giving the communities a say in the planning of their democracy.
However Public consultation documents do not necessarily work in the translation. The model, for
example of capitalist exploitation : the PPP, in ireland, brings people and communities into a
consultation role in decision -making but the process is always weighted toward retaining the Status Quo.
The model is so sucessful that Cameron (Tory) is looking at the issue with regard to the future development
of the internal British systems (they also tried the plastax). Imagine, Ireland's programmes for reform which are little more
than conveniences are translating into EU power systems! (and we are juggling with their effects on a daily basis).

The nitty gritty details of working from the commune to el presidente and the machinery in between will proof the
pudding: the disparity betwixt paper law and actual change= crumbs off the bird table.

Circles within circles.
The PPP can be seen in the breaking of unions.
The Planning process.
The NDP.
The dilution of local Government and the granting of executive type powers to non-mandated individuals,
so far John Fitzgerald (in DCC and Limerick).

by G Timony Sun Aug 19, 2007 13:12

Nice piece of disinformation, I would laugh hilariously if I was not so sick and tired of this kind of crap... As has been pointed out ad-nauseum Chavez isn't proposing to make himself 'president for life'. In fact some might accuse him of being way too liberal given it has taken him 5 years to take action against the coup supporting RCTV (a situation that would hardly be tolerated in any other country)
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2370 (Venezuela's RCTV Defies Government, Supreme Court Allows Broadcast)

Other recent articles:
Chavez Proposes Changes to Venezuela’s Constitution to Pave Way for Socialism (Venezuela based left wing site)
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2389
The Old Iran-Contra Death Squad Gang is Desperate to Discredit Chavez-by John Pilger (UK Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2150484,00.html
Guardian's John Pilger must rectify description of Venezuela's economy! (USA/Canadian based pro-Chavez site)
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=75375
Hugo Chávez Editorial -By: Ignacio Ramonet - Le Monde Diplomatique
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=2113
Chavez’s foes promoting subversion, separatism (Communist Party USA related site)
http://www.pww.org/index.php/article/articleview/11557/...1/386
Datanalisis Poll: 80% of Venezuelans optimistic about Venezuela's future
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=75355

By the way there is a Venezuelan indymedia: http://venezuela.indymedia.org/es/index.shtml
(maybe it ain't to the liking of the author of this article)

by gurgle Sun Aug 19, 2007 19:17

Really wonderful they've been busy in three months making up for an absence of five to six years. Pity the last commentator can't by his own admission (of "non-existent spanish" made in another comment) read anything on those pages. You could take off their newswire such delights as
http://venezuela.indymedia.org/es/2007/08/10272.shtml http://venezuela.indymedia.org/es/2007/08/10259.shtml
http://venezuela.indymedia.org/es/2007/08/10199.shtml now if you could read those instead of quoting ancient Pilger texts, or if you could sit and chat to a Venezuelan in their own language then you would probably be a little less Chavista, Chav! Chav! Chav!. But instead you rejoice that the "liberal" caudillo closed a telly station you couldn't actually understand if it was on the box in your livingroom.
You're talented beyond description & should probably seek a position in the foreign affairs department.

by G. Timony Sun Aug 19, 2007 20:24

To 'gurgle'
Yes, my spanish is pratically non-existant, do I take it you are offering a translation, or are merely insulting me because of my self-confessed lack in lingistic abilities? Or are you are only linking to articles you agree with perhaps? And who exactly is this 'we' you refer to anyway?
By the way there is at least one pro-bolivarian article on this site
http://venezuela.indymedia.org/es/2007/08/10063.shtml (One of only 2 I could find in english)

Quote from 'Fredrick Forsyth's' so-called article at the top of this page: 'And no there never was a Venezuelan indymedia' - Thanks for pointing out that it was me who mentioned that yes a Venezuela Indymedia actually exists (and has existed since 2003 if my spanish isn't totally screwed up : http://venezuela.indymedia.org/en/2007/03/128.shtml )

As far as the RCTV TV station is concerned, how many 'democracies' would allow a broadcaster who supported a coup(2002) against the democratically elected government remain open for so long? Everything I read about this station (admidtedly only in english) leads me to be very suspicious of it's defenders, for example: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=2112 (How RCTV President’s CIA Connection Links Venezuela and Nicaragua).

What is your justification for calling Chavez a 'caudillo' (dicactor I presume) ? Bearing in mind that he was re-eIected last year with 63% of the vote, it wouldn't be that you simply dislike his racial inheritance? The fact that his skin colour is not as white as you would like? What exactly is your agenda anyhow? Or do you perhaps refuse to condescend to explain it to those of us mere mortals who can't follow spanish too well? Or perhaps I should thank you for condescending to reply from whatever arrogant intellectual heights you presume to inhabit?

by C Sun Aug 19, 2007 20:51

There is also a great deal of mainstream media coverage on the political movements in Venezula
as well as links in the varied south american and spainish-speaking sites. The point of indymedia
is that it contains other press and opinion sections. Looking up the search engine and following
the threads may lead the above commentator to an answer regarding Chavez's naming.
But otherwise maybe freddie could add in the links for someone who came to
an opinon piece or other press later in the discussion than regular readers.
[The search engine comprises the little green strip at the top right of the page]

by gurgle ribid yawn spit in your eye. Sun Aug 19, 2007 21:23

I'm sure this has been gone through now, since I started using the term in connection with Chavez over three years ago. However, it is likely that some Chavs aren't familiar with the word, its use or even its popularity in Latin American migrant circles in Europe. For indeed I'm happy to write that today I'm not the only person who calls Chavez a caudillo. A Caudillo is a popularist head of state with military background who uses a historical cloak of references to maintain his reign. Some caudillos have been bad bad men and others have been quite alright standing tall & noble in their stocking feet. Chavez uses the historical legacy of Bolivar who is considered the first caudillo of the Americas he thus places the historical validity of his government and philosophy firmly in the tradition of caudillism. Chavez is a former military officer who led a failed coup d'etat that is pretty caudillo type behaviour, it's not really the sort of thing that non-caudillo types do. Trust me on that. it's human nature. Chavez is a master of popularism earning such titles as "caudillo" from me as affectionately as I also call him quite simply "the man". I was pleased to see that title used in a radio program I mentioned in comments the week he sought and got his 18 months of rule by decree. I remember telling indymedia ireland readers how a group of CNT alligned anarchosyndicalists had wondered would Venezuela be so changed and so wonderful in 18months that of course nobody in their right mind would ask "the man" to give his decree powers back. In the same vein of affection but also true libertarian and anarchosyndicalist caution of power & perception of power being vested in either one individual or one sector or estate of any society, I reported his first decree nationalising the Orinoco fields with the phrase "good caudillo bad caudillo".
If I still have your attention or if those with whom I concur "the we in the peer review" - then here is the wikipedia page no Caudillo - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caudillo

Now I wrote this article and in truth have contributed no less than 40% of all the material on Venezuela on this website for over 5 years. Moreoften than not, when you gurgle your little book near Stalinist hymns of praise for the man in wrath against some petty observation that he's not the only person who can do this socialism stuff- it was I who brought you that indignation. I wrote in a specific way, full of now well-honed ruses to bring out the Chavs and nonChavs alike. I write as I write, not for being so minion of the US powers nor Oil corporations, I write as I write not as one in thrall with the dangerously personified "Bolivarian revolution" which thus far has extended happily to no other state in South America save arguably Bolivia at the hands of Garcia Linera & Evo Morales. I write and invite comment through a good-humoured love of South Americans with whom I share a European migrant community.

Now instead of gurgling endlessly with they're dupes of the pentagon ganging up on Chavez and tricking us into making war on his main mid Asian ally Iran why don't you realise which site you're on - what the contributors stand for - & tell us why the proposed 6th pillar of government in Venezuela falls sadly short of "the good government" of either model Chiapas or in struggle Oaxaca. & why such small progress in the direction of liberation of the campesino and native alike may only be taken as true socialism when Chavez leaves to be replaced by another head of state.

you up for that debate?

by G Timony Sun Aug 19, 2007 22:36

Thanks for the explanation of the term caudillo. As for the popularity of the term in Latin American(I presume you mean Venezeulan) migrant circles in Europe this is cause for some suspicion on my part as many enthusiastic supporters of the 'Bolivarian revolution' are surely unlikely to be found in their midsts, rather the opposite.
As for my 'little book near Stalinist hymns of praise' , I am not nor have ever considered myself a 'stalinist' . I vaguely considered labelling myself a marxist once upon a time, but not managing to grasp Marx's rather convoluted (in my opinion) rhetoric I gave up on that idea quite some time ago. I consider myself instead to be a socialist of a libertarian ilk . As for your 'observation that he's not the only person who can do this socialism stuff', you neglected to state that in your comments.
I agree that there seems to be too much riding on one man (Chavez) in Venezuela's case but there comes a time when you have to come down off the fence and take sides. I think when the US military pulls back in Iraq to the oilfields, Venezeula may be high up there in the target list for the neocons (being the USA's leading supplier of oil and all) . If not then it may come back to the old policy of dirty tricks and destabilisation in enforcing the 'Monroe doctrine'. For those who wish to see Latin America continue run its own affairs, the time to speak up is now, not when it's too late. But some prefer to take refuge in utopian ideologies forgetting the limitations and contradictions of human nature, criticizing all who fail to match up to impossible standards.
As for 'the proposed 6th pillar of government in Venezuela falls sadly short of "the good government" of either model Chiapas or in struggle Oaxaca' would you care to explain what exactly you are talking about?
Finally 'why such small progress in the direction of liberation of the campesino and native alike may only be taken as true socialism when Chavez leaves to be replaced by another head of state. ' I think most progressively minded people must hope that Venezuela can throw up a replacement with similar ideals or did you have someone specific in mind? Not the coup supporting Teodoro Petkoff or
Luis Miquielena I hope.

by gurgle Sun Aug 19, 2007 23:04

Good to see you're not a stalinist ;-) and realise this whole show is not just Chavez nor can be allowed to become "just Chavez". Hypothetically that would mean some awful day forty years into the future of regular pictures of a healthy Chavez in a red track suit eating yoghurt with some young socialist buck - just as Fidel now appears with Hugo. The Cuban revolution can and must move on from the past, & nobody is stopping it...
I reject for the moment comparisons of Chavez to Mugabe though am conscious that I first invited them three years ago, but the link was crass, in his own time even Amin found praise. As a "libertarian" socialist, one ought (I believe) look at the models of liberty, freedom of association and expression, seek the widest lattitude of debate and thus suffer criticism of all hue and foster non-heirarchial local organisation. At present I hold the Chiapas "good government" of the "neozapatistas" to be the best example of autonomous poor people doing their thing. Venezuelas place on the global hydrocarbon market or supply route has been long tested since the Monroe doctrine was first taken seriously. The state which has merrily had more caudillos than any other established near cartel relations with Iran back in the days of the first Oil crises. The only bunch of people who really expect the neo-cons and [I suppose the lobby behind "zapata corporation" the Latin American oil exploitation project of Bush senior] to "do Venezuela" or "to assassinate Chav the man" are those who believe his propaganda. Nobody is going near the man. He's as untouchable as Ghadaffi. He's right up there - powerful, rich, adored, witty and special. But I'm interested in the liberation of the poorest. Of course so is Castro, Ghadaffi, Chavez and Mugabe -
that's what they say & of all of them, the Cubans, the Libyans, the Zimbabweans and the Venezuelans - the Venezuelans have the best deal so far - no?

But strange how they hang on so long these enemies of the West - don't you think? At end I can't suggest a new head of state for Venezuela, a dauphin to Hugo - for the simple reason as you pointed out over 60% of the voters voted for him, but as I point out now less than 37% of the electorate voted and the poorest aren't even registered at birth. So I wouldn't feel like an anarchist of good conscience to put another "man" in the caudillo's throne. He worked hard for it.

by iosaf Tue Aug 21, 2007 22:46

The tins in the picture or are of tuna & have been distributed in the Peruvian areas of Pisco, Ica, Chincha and Cañete.
(the epicentre of the recent 7.9 richter scale quake which left over 75,000 people in desperation) according to a local newspaper "Expreso" the story has since been taken up all over the Spanish language media world and led to commentaries from both Peruvian & Venezuelan states.
The minister for information in Venezuela William Lara admitting the existence of the tuna tins which feature images of both Chavez "the man" (& the Peruvian etnocacerista ultra-nationalist he supported in the last Peruvian presidential elections Mr Humala who now leads the opposition in the Andean state) but denied that they were the work of Venezuelan aid agencies. Moreover Lara was very critical of Peruvian (& other) media entities for paying more attention to the Tuna tins with their either proChavez/Humala or.... antiChavez/Humala propaganda images than the actual provisioning of food and other aid the Venezuelan state has provided to Peru. Which while we're on the subject was the largest amount of aid offered by any South American state in keeping with Venezuela being the richest South American state. http://actualidad.terra.es/internacional/articulo/latas...0.htm Not withstanding the Peruvian president Alan García Pérez who last reached prominence in our newswire for his efforts to end impunctuality in his state ( http://www.indymedia.ie/article/73590#comment185234 lectured news agencies yesterday on the cynicism of foreign states attempting to garner political advantage or popularist edge from their aid, obviously the man has forgotten that previous to his election Mr Chavez had threatened to cut all assistance and aid to the Peruvian state should he win. All the same the tuna tins with their slogan "against looting and disaster - solidarity" have provided with Alan Garcia Perez with something else to talk about instead of asking people to stop looting "and forgetting the state is there" [sic]. Which of course is very easy to do in places like Pisco, Ico, Caracas & anywhere in South America - "forget the state is there" (just in case you're not keeping up with me).

It works like this - many hundreds of thousands of people in the so called "Third world" don't read or write, and so only recognise politicians by their photos or if their local facilities stretch to battery power their telly profile. Equally many millions of people in the so called "Third world" don't really have any concept of state except the army which very often is not even the military force ascribed legal and proper action by the international community. Thus in the poorer parts of Venezuela, Colombia, Peru or for that matter Ecuador, Brazil or Bolivia the "army" is the local militia be it a terrorist group, a narcotraffic guard or a criminal gang & the state is for most parts a fiction which may collect or repart taxes or fiscally derived benefits in "their name". Many people in the so called "First world" where the state has for a century encompassed every aspect of society, human life and endeavour thus automatically believe that the evils of capitalism may only find their correction in the establishment or extension of "marxist" or "post-marxist" state models. Alas, even in states such as Venezuela which is amongst the main suppliers of hydrocarbons on the planet, the state is not so developed beyond its main cities where children still sell roses and sniff glue and certainly is not much more powerful than its jungle or forest regions which are among the main areas of coca cultivation and cocaine production on the planet.......... another day's story perhaps which explains why nobody produced the tuna tins & nobody is going to overthrow Chavez..................
http://www.eluniversal.com/2007/08/21/int_art_denuncian...shtml
http://www.correoperu.com.pe/paginas_nota.php?nota_id=5...ota=5
http://www.correoperu.com.pe/paginas_nota.php?nota_id=5...ota=1

for the moment each person in the affected region may enjoy a tin of tuna, some rice and 2 litres of water every time they form an orderly queue. In no time the tins will be collected, washed and good "typically thrifty third world" use made of them through recycling and I sincerely doubt anyone beyond Lima or Caracas will ever bother to talk about the photos again.......until the next election......

mystery tins of aid with Chavez & Humela

by Barry - 32 csm Wed Aug 22, 2007 13:20

The coup implicated ,pro us , right wing television station RCTV has not been closed down . Its very much still broadcasting on cable and satellite . Those claiming it has been closed down are liars . Its like claiming Gordon Brown has closed down Sky television , untrue , nonsense , bullshit .
If these anarchists disagree with Chavez economic policies fair enough , but please dont subject Indymedia readers to the same lies spouted by the right wing press . Its an insult to peoples intelligence .
In my opinion the anarchists just despise Chavez because hes a nationalist . Therefore theyll happily tell lies about him becuase they regard him as an ideological enemy .
Please stop telling lies .

by G Timony Wed Aug 22, 2007 17:21

In my opinion the reason these 'anarchists' are so hard on Chavez is because he's had the audicity to actually make an attempt to implement some of their ideas (such as workers co-operatives + communal councils), something they will never do not in a 100 million years, at their present rate of progress (let's hope I am wrong on that). It is mainly a case of pique. The old ultra-leftist thing of coming doing hardest on those nearest to your own opinions. They really need to stand back a bit and get a grip. One suspects a few of them may be hoping to get jobs on the Indo! - (sorry just a joke or at least I hope so-but remembering that old 70s trot Gene McKenna anything is possible). Also lecturing South Americans on the dangers of nationalism smacks a bit of a Euro-centric colonialist attitude, especially as Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Cuba and Nicaragua are now effectively in the Bolivarian camp, with Argentina and others hovering on the outskirts (if only to get a piece of Chavez's largesse). If it's nationalism then it's a pan- latin american one. I think they've earned the right to try their own thing for a change.
Of course my facts may not be 100%, but then no-one knows everything. Let's have a more rational debate about this, without the constant nitpicking. . As for Oaxaca and Chiapas, etc, I cheerfully admit I know sweet all about those subjects, but am willing to be educated. There is more than one way to skin a cat as they say. To conclude remember Durutti, I seen some of his speeches, inspiring stuff, but he was a leader at the end of the day, if he was alive today in Latin America, maybe he would be another Chavez. Who knows for sure?

by G. Timony Wed Aug 22, 2007 19:14

Whoops! My quote: 'remembering that old 70s trot Gene McKenna' ... I meant Gene Kerrigan of course!

by Barry - 32 csm Wed Aug 22, 2007 19:26

Venezuela is very much a colonised society . As Chavez himself pointed out the revolution is not simply economic but to overthrow the ruling spanish colonisers and defend the nation and its people from US and multinational imperialism . The robust defence of national sovereignty is essential in such circumstances , essential for all colonised nations including our own . The removal of the IMF for instance from interference in Veneuzelas internal affairs has been a major triumph for the Bolivarian revolution . The continuing removal of multinational oil companies and the seizing of their operations for the Venezuelan people is a major step forward . This is a revolution in action . The people are being armed and trained in their tens of thousands , not just with military equipment but with the ideological and organisational tools of the revolution and the new national university , where academic studies will be taught alongside the constitution , political organisation and communication to the masses as well as military training also for the students , all for free and for the poor .
To denounce Chavez as a "caudillo" , hinting at Francoism and right wing authoritarianism is childish . To hint that the Americans regard him as an asset and would never contemplate asassinating him is absolutely ridiculous and an insult to peoples intelligence . The way forward for all colonised peoples is , as Fanon and Sartre pointed out decades ago , the defence of national sovereignty in all its manifestations , territorial , economic , cultural and political . That is the only way to break free from the shackles of the "europeans" .
As positive as the developments in Chiapas have been they have been localised . They do not possess , in my opinion , the capacity to break out of that localised region and change the entire central and southern American political scene . That is not to deride them in any manner , I fully salute them , but the development of full national sovereignty and social progress amongst the colonised nations , those that have been raped of their resources by a foreign elite and the citizenry kept illiterate and impoverished , requires finance and industrial planning . Its essential and thats what Chavez brings very importantly to the anti colonial and progressive equation . At the same time localised democracy , that is democracy at its maximum expression , is being actively encouraged and actively empowered . Actively armed , trained and educated .
Chavez is the real deal in my opinion and a genuine threat to colonialism and multinational capitalist hegemony . While anarchism has many positive aspects to it it is a european analysis , not fully suited to the needs of the colonised societys . It cannot in my opinion come to grips with the essential concept of the coloniseds national sovereignty and the necessity for its defence before society can progress . Therefore as some cannot come to grips intellectually with chavez and the concept of the coloniseds defence of national sovereignty , largely as a result of their own european ideology ( in an Irish context an imported ideology from a mainland full of colonisers) they regard nationalists such as Chavez as an enemy , an ideological square peg . And therefore the enemy , the square peg , must be demonised .
Caudillo , dictator, class traitor , stooge . etc etc etc .

A deeply flawed analysis in my opinion , intellectually and ideologically stunted .

by C Wed Aug 22, 2007 19:46

The faith we always put in the perceived 'strongman', Chavez, Castro , Bush etcetera...

the zapatistas stand out cos they include women in their democratic /activist processes.
jayzhus, now chavez needs a wifelet. For godsakes why do people so willingly submit
to the ideology that a man will take away their problems, 'educate' them and organise them?
Its projection of the worst order- and also says that communities need piecemeal
patronising leadership. The wealth gap in venezula has grown along the lines of all
globalised socities with golf courses for the very wealthy and little commune type community
consultation areas for those who think that government sponsorship of trotskyite
seminars will change the direction of a nation. The grassroots are those that are daily
juggling with the education and healthcare of the future of nations and they are not invited
to the discussion processes, they are on the streets opposing the CAFTA.

but sure its all cool, emphasis male organisational structures and like Castro, when the
revolution is over order the women into the kitchen or into skirts, let the big boys
bring along the small boys- an unbroken, deeply uninclusive process , guaranteed with
the support of the wealth class to suceed in the continuance of eco destruction and
industrialisation.

by Barry - 32 csm Wed Aug 22, 2007 19:56

but he hasnt got breasts either

Thats the revolution fecked then is it ?

by C Wed Aug 22, 2007 20:13

He has gained some, and possibly has little man-breasts.
Communities should be represented by communities, that includes men and women,
funnily enough the women in Northern ireland got chucked off for the boys to be doing the biz
with Bertie, O! we really are the weaker sex in our skirts and kitchens.

women must deal with the effects of economic polict , it is logical therefore to assume that
their considerations , be it in ireland, iran, china or Venezula be given parity of esteem.
Interestingly all fiscal and revolutionary policy focusses on the male.
Marx instead of Luxemburg. same in art. same with regards to representation on how
our communities are directed be it eco/healthcare/food production

by iosaf Wed Aug 22, 2007 21:34

& Fanon certainly is a good place to start in understanding post-colonialism - but for many important reasons we have moved beyond even post-colonialism. One could argue ( & I do ) that Fanonist notions underlied the creation of the non-alligned movement in the 20th century and certainly demarked strategic elements in the first alliance between Venezuela and Iran in the mid 20th century amidst the attempts by non-1st world countries to use their leverage "oil" as a bargaining chip in their dealings with the first world just as the geopolitical balance switched from the French & British control (indirect or direct) of such resources to the US hegemony. Alas, those analysis are not suitable to today's world or today's markets. I have consistently brought attention to the largest black markets which are in dollar terms more valuable than oil or the highest three commodities when considering the geopolitical impact of US "neo-con" behaviour in Asia. Where everyone else called "no blood for oil" I chirped "no blood for smack". It is my considered opinion that the importance of both cocaine and heroin to the global economy and moreso - the structure and cohesion of western capitalist models of society are paramount. I sometimes ask my students to imagine different ways their "world" might end. They often mention "the day after tomorrow" (a sudden change of climate) or they bring un-noticed asteroids into collision with the planet, or they go microbial and we all catch some plague & die. Great ideas - each one given much attention in the popular movies which form our understanding of global issues. But each one is unlikely in the very short-term - rather I ask them to consider what would happen if their dealer died.
How long would even non-smoking Dublin last if tomorrow there was to be no more nicotiene?

Anyway - none of this has anything to do with outlining the model of Chiapas the phenomena of Oaxaca and comparing same to the proposed 6th pillar of the Venezuelan constitution "the peoples' assemblies". I suggest humbly as ever that the tits of Chavez or the tuna of Humala are irrelevant to the proposed creation of such local councils, for they are not often suggested by any state. It is thus timely that socialist of either authoritarian "big man" types or anarcho-syndicalist (I'd rather loot than eat the tuna) types really wonder what ought we expect from such councils. It is the challenge of our age. Much is to be won or lost in the workings of these councils - they have the early 21st century potential tobe a model for success or dilution of all socialist principles. Will the blue book of Chavez go the the same way as the green book of Ghadaffi? Will these threads of "nationalism" (mentioned above by another commentator) which are forever lurking under the mutual antagonism of South Americans bring us Humala or Morales as the other element - the "rolling revolution or trans-national character" of Bolivarianism (as defined by Chavez) spreads?
Indeed why isn't it spreading? & before anyone gurgles about Bolivia - I'd suggest reading the archives and brushing up on the local levels of content with that regime in the last year since I heralded its birth by translating the declarations of the coca farmers for you.

:-) I'd probably loot and take the tuna.

by pat c Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:31

Chavez is an interesting character, I'm not sure if Caudillo is the right term for him. He subjects his policies to referendum, he himself is subject to re-election or defeat at regular intervals. Getting rid of trm limits might not be a great idea but its not the same as becoming President for life.

Ghadaffi is not democratically elected, nor is the Libyan Parliament democratically elected. I dont think its valid to compare Chavez with Ghadaffi.

by iosaf Thu Aug 23, 2007 21:30

I mentioned both in the same sentance for a reason more important than trite "blue book / green book" father of the nation reforms. It was to stir the stick in the mud of our geopolitical understanding. Let us consider how the west has changed in their relations with Ghadaffi over the last decades, and especially in the last four years and how they are becoming ever more reliant on his acquiescene in any Darfur adventure by the UN to the point of shoring up his regime with massive arms shipments and hugs from Berlusconi, Aznar and most lately Sarkozy (though where as the other 2 ghouls did hug Ghadaffi - Sarko let his wife do it).
Whereas one side we see tactical opposition to Chavez & democratic reforms on the other we see a military dictator being courted almost as a "poacher turned gamekeeper" but without any startling or justifying results (at least not any the public can refer to).

Literacy in South America is an interesting indicator of local activity. We can't credit any head of state (be they caudillo or not) with literacy unless they make it a priority of their governmental programme. At the moment the priority of the Venezuelan state is nationalisation & "substituting private interests with that of public good in governance" - in Chavez' words "everything which was nationalised before will be nationalised again". = Rather than a revolutionary economic process it might actually be termed a retroactive conservative economic process but one which uses very modern techniques of marketing & dare I jest - packaging. I say that, not to detract from what is happening, but because I get the distinct impression that many people don't understand what occured in Latin America when Bush senior was playing with the CIA & the Zapata Oil corporation, Operation Condor or the SOA. It's rather like forming opinions on European history or political development without remembering the Warsaw pact or Berlin wall.
Or to put it another way - not connecting the dots of the post WW2 "odessa" and Washington's struggle with Moscow - or yet another way - not really understanding where Pinochet came from.
Or yet another - that people have nearly forgotten how the Iraq war began and believe the "neo-con" bullshit that the USA is capable (which it is not) of bullying the world in quite the same way as before.

Venezuela is currently in the middle band of South American literacy rates according to UNICEF falling short behind Argentina, Uraguay and Chile, just below Colombia & well above Brazil & Mexico. But that much said, Venezuela under Chavez did make education an important part of their many achievements. illteracy before Chavez stood at 9% - though most of the initial spending was on improving universities, establishing the "Bolivar university" at the same time cutting the funds to the other universities (here we have one of those make up your Chav/nonChav minds - the rectors of the other universities claimed the funds were withheld because they were anti-governmental - which they were - so they would say that - wouldn't they?)
the regime used the army to build primary schools (recall how I said the army represents the state for most really poor people) and that combined with health centres saw over 1.4 million adults learn to read and write in the last four years. That is a great achievement. It is also credit not only to a regime but to the many thousands of individuals who work in those schools. So - it is a grass roots as well as regime achievement. No matter that UNICEF and the Venezuelans disagree as to the exact level of that achievement.

a mixture of sources -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Robinson
http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=425....html
http://ipsnoticias.net/nota.asp?idnews=35621

Local Councils in Venezuela presently operate under articles 70, 167 and 184 of the 1999 constitution. But according to news report a few days ago Mr Chavez explaining his proposals for the current "blue book reforms" wants the various commitees (which cover land reform, stop evictions, health centres, schools, literacy, water & extension of telecommunications) to co-ordinate their activities more closely. & here I come to a point - thus far in Ireland's english speaking socialist network, we only report or allude to co-ordinate activity of this plethora of councils or local soviets when they join together to say the CIA are plotting a coup.
I argue that a switch in psychology is needed. Less talk of US usurption and more talk of Venezuelan grass root achievement. Less Chavez "the man" & more Venezuelans. Just as I suggest regards Bolivia - as serious infighting finally led to blows being exchanged in the parliament today - that more "bolivians" and less Evo Morales is good. At the top of the election section of indymedia ireland we see a Bolivian miner in a thumbnail image holding a stick of dynamite, that was several days after he was supposed to put it down. He'd probably take the tuna and loot too.

Which leaves me transmitting the news to you that earlier today the 4th pillar of the Constitution, the Electoral office announced that the forthcoming referendum (under article 344 of the '99 constitution) to ratify "the blue book's 33 reforms" is to be brought forward & though without set date will be held next month September.
http://www.eltiempo.com.ve/noticias/default.asp?id=121736

by Barry - 32 csm Thu Aug 23, 2007 23:42

In Jean Paul Sartres preface to Fanons "wretched of the earth" he made the very important point that the activities of the revolutionaries engaged in the process of colonial overthrow are not being done for european approval or disapproval , which are irrelevant to the coloniseds equation . They are being done in national self interest and in defence of national sovereignty , regardless of "european" sensibilites . As one of the colonised , with my own sense of national consciousness , that of a colonised nation , Im frankly aghast at the "european" concern expressed by many of my fellow countrymen and women at the Bolivarian revolution and its simple bloodless measures such as the removal of presidential term limits . These term limits themselves were little more than a political nicety , allowing the 2 sets of spanish gentleman elites to pass the golden cup between them in a civilised european manner while the natives went without . The term limits were little more than the veneer of the Venezuelan colonial farce . To express concern at their removal is ridiculous in my opinion , Venezuela is not Paris or Berlin or some other European bastion of social nicety where the gentlemen agreed gentlemens terms for a polite society once its wealth had been established from the theft of the colonised world . Why should it seek to emulate those societies for one second ? Why should it remotely care for their sensibilities or approval ?

Venezuela has seen centuries of colonial oppression and social engineering , it will take more than a few presidential terms to sort the place out much less even set it on the road to national recovery of its own sovereignty and the building of national consciousness alongside class consciousness , both extremely fragile concepts at the best of times but concepts necessary to resist old colonial and modern globalised oppression. But that work is being done .

The Bolivarian revolution began just as our own national revolution began , with an uprising . A defeated uprising but one that provided that essential revolutionary ingredient - hope . Chavez is highly important in all this in that he became the one who personified that uprising , making the same type of speech to the rebels and the nation to the television cameras as Patrick Pearse wrote in Moore street - surrender for now to avoid needless civilian causties , but we will be back .

" por ahora "

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUaBy3MtT2k&mode=related...arch=

He is therefore essential to the national consciousness upon which the Bolivarian revolution relies just as much as class consciousness , he is a national icon every bit as much as a leftist progressive icon . When the people came out onto the streets in defence of their nation during the coup they made it very clear what they thought of the coup plotters . Their cry was that theyd betrayed Venezuela , the nation , not just the working class . Theyd betrayed their own country and all of its people . The neighbouring states are unfortunate in that their mainstream leftist parties dont posess the same vibrancy of a national consciousness and an ongoing anti colonial revolution as exists in Venezuela . Of course the Bolivarian revolution must move on someday without Chavez at its head but "por ahora" he is essential to it .

So at so many of my own progressive countrymen and their "european" sensibilities I despair . In these crafted sensibilities i see the careful decades of social engineering persued by Eoghan Harris , Waters and others of their enlightened manipulative ilk , day in day out for decades in an Irish print and broadcast media that made RCTV look like Al Jazeera . Their self flagellating pavlovian exercises became mainstream enlightened consciousness a long time a go . They were and are highly pervasive and accepted as unquestioned truth regarding our nation and sense of self and dignity . I see the inability to distinguish the nation from the states borders , the revulsion and aversion at the concept of the nation and national sovereignty, the fear of upsetting polite european political sensibilities and failure to conform to their norms and niceties , even their anarchist ones .
I disagree with the point made by Iosaf , among many intersting and correct ones , that postcolonialism is dead from a Fanonian perspective . ( Id also point out that Fanon correctly predicted old style colonialisms metamorphosis into international commercial interests as opposed to invading nation states) Our psychological triggers as natives are still very much there and alive , our need to "lactify" ourselves , to mentally distance ourselves from the concept of nation , our nationhood and even ourselves , especially as a colonised people , as natives , we must disscoiate ourselves mentally rather than confront and engage. Our nationhood is sectarianism , backwardness , aggression and just not good manners for polite european society . It might offend someone . Not just as regards our territorial borders and waters but as regards our neutrality , our oil and our gas - demanding sovereignty over these aspects of our national sovereignty would cause offence to someone , someone civilised and polite , someone we want to be and try very hard to be . And when we do eventually raise some muted tepid protest at these incursions and encroachments and outright theft it is never from a national perspective , merely some article of state or some such lukewarm and useless shite that some shite lukewarm politican drafted while getting a backhander . But never national dignity or national sovereignty . It might offend or appear backward to a "European" , like ourselves , or more correctly as to the selves we imagine ourselves to be in distancing ourselves from the reality of our colonised status . So we shy away from thse confrontations rather than engaging in them with any dignity , national dignity .
Therefore when confronted with a Chavez , the real deal , a fire and brimstone nationalist leftist revolutionary whos prepared to used armed force and national consciousness as a tool alongsoide class consciousness there is immediate hesitancy and caution . Unlike a Che he is alive . Unlike Chiapas Chavez and Chavismo is mobile and potentially trans national . How can we support the Bolivarian revolution abroad yet regard our own national sovereignty and its defence as backward , sectarian aggression ? Of course we cant , so we dont . Instead we pick holes and urge caution and point out how uneuropean and cultured Mr Chavez is .

Whatever peoples opinion on Chavez all I can say is that during the late 80s I firmly closed the door on leftist politics for various reasons, and it remained firmly closed untill the Venezuelan coup and my understanding of the Bolivarian revolution . If that can inspire someone thousands of miles away who detested the left , then the failure of many on the Irish left to be inspired by the Bolivarian revolution points to their own inability to inspire their fellow countrymen .

by G Timony Sat Aug 25, 2007 12:51

Don't quite follow everything you guys and girls are talking about, but it's nice to see this thread finally moving in a positive direction... Iosaf I agree less reference to Chavez +Morales, etc is needed and more attention to the grassroots element. Barry's colonialist analysis is also interesting, specially in the Irish context. Must say I had a similar depolitisation experience to him, being a former member of the WSM (in Cork briefly), Labour party(intermittently) and Socialist Labour Party(back in pre-history!), and the whole Latin American thing has also helped to rekindle my interest in leftist politics (in a positive way) as well as the Palestinian/Isreali tragedy (in a really have to 'get up and do something about this' way). C, as an ignorant male myself, more woman's perspectives would definitely be interesting. Anyone involved in the LASC? (just joined though their activism seems a little anaemic at the mo, any opinions?)
Got a lot of reading to do in following up these links,etc. Thanks ...