Venezuela's Social Democracy Hits A Speed Bump - by Stephen Lendman
Hugo Chavez addressed upwards of a half million supporters on the final day of campaigning for constitutional reform on December 1. He was confident of a victory that seemed assured. The turnout was impressive as a sea of red filled Caracas' main Avenida Bolivar boulevard and spilled over into adjourning streets. It dwarfed the November 29 final opposition rally Rupert Murdock's Times online/UK and Fox News estimated at "more than 100,000" ahead of saying "polls predicted an agonizingly close result" that referred only to the corporate-run ones. They turned out to be right.
A day ahead of the vote, Chavez addressed the joyous crowd saying a "yes" vote will "open the path to socialism (and is) a vote for Chavez and the revolution (while) vot(ing) "no" is a vote for Bush. We are not simply confronting the pawns of imperialism. Our true enemy is US imperialism (that) will only recognize the results if they win."
Writing this article began on Sunday. It intended to say they didn't, but sadly they did so the struggle continues. It's too early to know what's next after this crucial election loss on top of the disturbing information James Petras and Eva Golinger reported in separate articles on November 28 - that Venezuelan counterintelligence uncovered an internal November 20 CIA memorandum from the US Embassy in Caracas. It revealed a secret plot called "Operations Pliers" to destabilize the referendum and as Petras put it: "coordinate the civil military overthrow of the elected Chavez government. The Embassy-CIA polls concede(d) that 57 per cent of voters approved (of Chavez reforms while) predict(ing) a 60 per cent abstention." They were wrong.
Golinger wrote that a CIA-funded "PSYOPS" propaganda campaign was being waged with over $8 million in the past month for corporate polling firms to cook their numbers against Chavez, work with the dominant media to report it and continue a torrent of anti-Chavez scare talk. Petras covered the same ground and said "Food producers, wholesale and retail distributors have created artificial shortages of basic food items" and tried to "sow chaos" by "provok(ing) large scale capital flight."
Venezuelan-based Media Left editor, Gary Ghirardi, explained this further. In an email to this writer, he said: "food shortages....are the result of (elements of) the military selling food slated for the poorest Venezuelans (in) Colombia and....the black market" to enrich "unscrupulous military managers.....The poor are affected by this corruption (and that took its toll on Chavez's) support base." It helps explain "why 3 million of the poor....did not go to vote." In December, 2006, 7.3 million Venezuelans voted for Chavez's reelection. This time, only 4.4 million supported constitutional reform against 4.5 million opposed.
"Another reason (for this result was) the complexity of the reform issues" that required close reading to understand. Many Chavez supporters likely didn't do it and were easy to sway by corporate media propaganda opposing them. Gharardi also believes Chavez overestimated the citizenry's "political education" and may have tried to advance his socialist agenda too fast. Had reforms been fewer in number, easier to understand, and directed toward social programs for the poor and community power, he'd likely have prevailed. These are lessons to be learned for a future round of social changes sure to come.
But they'll face the same stiff opposition and kinds of threats the CIA memo revealed to counter an expected Chavez win. Some actions were ongoing for weeks, others were planned (but not used) for election day, and it now remains to be seen what's ahead. The memo laid it out:
-- more disruptive and violent street protests;
-- provoking a "general uprising" and "climate of ungovernability;"
-- discrediting the National Elections Council (CNE) by accusing it of fraud and manipulation of results; cross out this one for now;
-- discrediting Chavez to isolate him in the international community; and much more including encouraging a military rebellion and readying US forces in neighboring Curacao and Colombia to support it.
In Petras' words, Venezuelans had "a rendezvous with history" on Sunday to "provide the legal framework for (further democratizing) the political system, the socialization of strategic economic sectors, (further) empower(ing) the poor, and provid(ing) the basis for a self-managed factory system." Winning impressively and avoiding a likely bloodbath from "a successful US-backed civil-military uprising" prevents the reversal of "the most promising living experience of popular self-rule (anywhere), of advanced social welfare and democratically based socialism." One electoral defeat is disheartening but changes nothing. Venezuela's struggle for social democracy continues under a man who's worked nine years to build it. Don't ever count him out or his strong popular support.
The Struggle Continues
A partial draft of this article was written Sunday under the incorrect topic heading - Savoring the Triumph. It began:
For now, victory is sweet and Chavistas savored it all night on Caracas streets. Manana was back to reality and the knowledge that triumph is never secure as long as an imperial power threatens it. Nine years of social progress can be erased with a keyboard click the way coup plotters did it on April 11, 2002 for two days. After deposing Chavez, they repealed the Bolivarian Constitution, dissolved the National Assembly and Supreme Court, and dismissed the attorney general and comptroller. Only mass people power with military support put Chavez back in office. So far, he's prevailed impressively in every presidential, parliamentary, municipal and referendum election since December, 1998....until now. Here's the record:
I am a 72 year old, retired, progressive small businessman concerned about all the major national and world issues, committed to speak out and write about them.
the sticking point for some was the extension of the Term of Office for the President. I wonder why Chavez, who has five more years to serve, doesnt delete this point and return to the voters next year.
I am solidly a supporter of Hugo Chavez and that which he is bringing, not only to Venezuela, but to the entire region. After all, anyone who calls Bush the devil and says he smells sulphur and brimstone in public has my attention! Chavez is almost alone in opposing US imperialism in South America and such an idea could and should spread.
But at the same time I am also fond of the democratic process and a President who is allowed to serve for a very long period of time may become an obstacle to the growth of democracy. Surely Hugo can have a great influence on that region after leaving office.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 12:49:51 PM
Stalin and Kim tended to get more pushy as they got older. Fidel, fortunately got milder as he got older, slowly changing from the hot head that executed his enemies soon after he became in charge. Several hippy communes had a hassle getting their once enlightened leader to retire.
So I cheer the Venezuelans. However, I am worried about what it means for the rest of the world. The way the CIA is spinning it as a success for the US. We are entering a world where bin Laden and suicidal nealists with their “I ain’t going to take it any more theatrics” offer inspiration for the disenchanted, and mistreated, Columbine, Virginia Tech. and now in Finland of all places. A suicidal doctor, slamming his car into a gate killing only himself in a fiery cash supposedly accomplishing something while a Buddhist monk executed while defiantly praying in public is instead considered a sad story.
Bin Laden, Armageddon seeking Christians, and Jewish neocons have some sort of what they consider good news coming, and know how to use each other toward that purpose. But the real problem for the world is the lack of positive inspiration.
Firstly, the "infamous" CIA memo from Agent Michael Middleton Steere has never been authenticated. Agent Steere, to the extent he is a real person, has (to date) neither had his diplomatic immunity stripped nor has he been expulsed from the country. You can "wax rhapsodic" all you want about a memo whose existence has yet to be proved, but it adds no validity or logical reasoning to your subsequent assertions of CIA involvement in the opposition vote on the constitutional referendum vote.
And secondly, could a source please be provided for this statement - "The way the CIA is spinning it as a success for the US,"? I tried searching for the CIA commenting on the recent referendum vote but couldn't find any comments - good or bad - by the CIA or even Agent Steere.
Chavez will return to push through his constituional reforms. His comments at the time of his concession speech validate as such. Chavez stated that he would, "continue in the battle to build socialism... For now, we couldn't do it... I will not [though] withdraw even one comma of this proposal, this proposal is still alive..." - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7124313.stm .
by
Tom Murphy (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 1280 comments)
on Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 1:58:52 PM
As usual your article is far better than most keep up the good work.
Tom has a point about the authenticity of 'the memo'. Tragically when it comes to the CIA and other American Alphabet soup organizations it is difficult to separate the Hollywood Urban myths (water on dripping on stone media conditioning) and reality. One is entitled to ask how much is truly political speak via its symbiotic relationship with the media and the media’s salacious grab attention in order to sell advertising.
However given their history and selfserving nature of both (government instrumentalities and the media) one does tend to believe that the memo may contain an element of truth.
All security organizations are by definition conspiratorial, secretive and paranoid. If there weren’t any perceived threats their very existence would superfluous. Andris’ Observation of organizations: The primary objective of any organization is to survive and this objective supersedes all other purposes.Like wise Richard also has a point, Andris’ first Observations of Organizational renewal: The longer an organization exists unchanged the less relevant it becomes to it purpose of its creation. This is followed by Andris’ second Observation of Organizational renewal: The longer a leader stays in play the more good intentions change into atrophying ideology that supersedes all other purposes. ( proof of this was Australia’s John Howard whoultimately become only the 2ndsitting Prime Minister in Australia’s history to lose his seat…. Why? Because He lost touch with the people and went all “ideologically Right” (Work Choices)
In short only time will tell if Chavez is ajust another self obsessed ideologue or a true leader. Implicit in the latter is wisdom to know when to go. Having said that, it would appear that his record so far while patchy is over all impressive.
The independence of the Electoral Commission is reminiscent of many Countries like Australia and New Zealand. One can also note that flaw in his voting system is the literacy level of Venezuelan peasants. Ie If you can’t read how do you know that the print out is an accurate depiction of your intentions. Other than that maybe there’s a lesson for America.
by
Andris (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 532 comments)
on Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 5:51:42 PM
