Venezuela’s State Elections: When Winning Comes before Revolution

Dec 12th 2012, by Tamara Pearson - VENEZUELANALYSIS.COM
[image: Supporters rally for PSUV candidate for Merida, Alexis Ramirez.
Their placards say “Alexis – governor, loyalty always” (YV]

Supporters rally for PSUV candidate for Merida, Alexis Ramirez. Their
placards say “Alexis – governor, loyalty always” (YVKE Mundial).

“We’ll deal with it when the state elections are over,” a comrade said to
me.

“Ah, but then there’s the mayoral elections in April,” I replied.

Internal debate and criticism of the PSUV and its current state election
campaign, as well as proper grassroots involvement would be put off, and
put off, because in this incredibly democratic country there is always some
kind of election coming up. Yet for how long will such sacrifices be made
in the name of defeating the capitalist opposition?

Aram Aharonian, writing in
Rebelion<http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=160268&titular=sin-ch%E1vez-en-campa%F1a-cada-quien-atiende-su-juego->
last
week, was right when he argued that this Sunday’s state elections aren’t
just “one election, they’re 23 different elections”, because each state has
its own socio-economic characteristics and different types of candidates
running  -from bureaucrats, to an indigenous minister, to the military, to
the well known and the unknown.

However, all of the 23 PSUV candidates were chosen by President Hugo Chavez
and the national PSUV executive. The PSUV is a national “machine”, as we
are prone to call it here, and despite some regional differences, its state
campaigning has been conducted according to national lines and a national
strategy. So, although this article will focus on experiences in Merida
state, the problems discussed of treating PSUV members like voters rather
than activists, of isolating political parties and movements that are not
aligned to the PSUV and so on, are problems that are across the board, and
though more pertinent in this election campaign, can be said to be general
problems in the PSUV.

*Chavez’s candidates*

Not only one of the main election slogans, (here in Merida: “Alexis
Ramirez, candidate of Chavez!”) the idea that the PSUV governor candidates
are associated with, and chosen by Chavez is a key political strategy the
PSUV has been using over the last few months.

It’s a stance that suggests the party leadership are unconfident their
candidates have merit on their own, and also that the PSUV’s objectives of
socialism, justice, economic and land reform and so on, have merits on
their own. It’s a dependence on the guaranteed victory the character of
Chavez brings, but it has also been used as a way to make the PSUV the only
“real” Chavista party, and to delegitimise other revolutionary, pro-Chavez
organisations and parties which haven’t dissolved into the PSUV, such as
the Venezuelan Communist Party (PCV), the Tupumaros movement, and even
unions and the Great Patriotic Pole (GPP).

As a member of the PSUV national executive, and also head of the national
assembly, Diosdado Cabello told the press
yesterday<http://www.avn.info.ve/contenido/cabello-tenemos-posibilidades-ganar-23-gobernaciones>,
“Chavez has just one candidate in each state. We can’t impose any candidate
on our allies, but what we ask of them is that they don’t say they are
candidates of Chavez, because they aren’t.” He also made the exaggerated
claim that “Socialist candidates [PSUV] will win in all 23 states on
Sunday”.

The tactic aims at preventing a divided vote; as Chavez said before he left
for Cuba on Sunday, “Unity, Unity, Unity”, yet it is a unity that excludes
anyone who isn’t in the PSUV.

And then there is the big question of why, during a revolution, are these
candidates Chavez’s candidates and not the people’s candidates? For Merida
state, Chavez and the PSUV national executive, based far away in Caracas,
picked the unknown Alexis Ramirez for the candidate for governor. Then they
chose Rafael Ramirez, energy minister and president of PDVSA and not at all
familiar with Merida; an agricultural state and not an oil one, in charge
of the campaign. There was no consultation of PSUV membership. While
perhaps primary elections are not the best road, since many registered
members of the PSUV actually support the opposition, there was no reason
not to call state wide meetings of the active membership of the PSUV and
even other organisations, to both elect candidates and decide on
campaigning platform, and strategy.

*“Loyalty” to a person rather than to a program or to proposals*

Two more words or slogans that have been thrown around a lot during the
PSUV campaigning, both at the state and national levels, are “loyalty” and
“discipline”.  Yet the discipline doesn’t refer to good, serious,
revolutionary organisation, nor to waging a hard campaign, nor to combating
bureaucracy and corruption, but rather to unquestioning support for the
handpicked candidates.

Here in Merida, we were given Alexis Ramirez, a young geographer, a local
legislator, who in the last five years I have never seen in any of the
political marches or rallies or events, or even when Chavez spoke here a
few weeks before the presidential elections. There is also evidence that
Ramirez committed serious acts of corruption as a legislator, and it is
felt that he is largely a puppet and that there will be other people behind
the scenes, people we don’t know, governing for him.

One comrade said to me, “Those who don’t support Alexis [Ramirez], are
called traitors...I have to be “loyal” to Chavez by lying to him and
telling him his candidate is the best, no I can’t do that. This electoral
campaign has been about persecution and fear”.

The comrade said he will vote for Florencio Porras, the candidate the PCV
has put up. Porras, who was governor of Merida from 2000-2008 and is
“revolutionary light”  (that is, a pro-Chavez reformist) will likely get a
significant vote, though he won’t win.  PSUV members have stuck up posters
around the city calling Porras a traitor. One poster has modified the PCV’s
symbol, the red rooster, to be a rooster with crutches, labelled a “gallo
cojo” or lame rooster,  a message that is disrespectful of people with
disabilities. Another PSUV poster shows Lester Rodriguez, the opposition
candidate, taking off a mask that is Porras’ face.

The PSUV communication committee has also posted graphics around Facebook
with quips such as “You say you’re more revolutionary than me, but you’re
campaigning for a candidate that’s not one of Chavez’s?” and “In battle,
division is betrayal”.

Even though Chavez has gone to great pains to encourage and legitimise
criticism and self-criticism and the denouncing of bureaucracy and
corruption, clearly any PSUV bureaucrats hoping to be in power are not
going to do the same.

*The clubs of friends within the PSUV leadership*

Unfortunately, for many of the PSUV’s candidates, winning the elections
comes before real revolution (participation, grassroots organisation,
transparency, accountability etc) because that is what is more important to
them. They are using the PSUV to gain positions of power and money.

The blind “loyalty” and “discipline” they promote benefits them. Further,
once PSUV members go along with such loyalty, refusing to criticise, they
are then taken for granted and used by the PSUV bureaucracy, which will not
feel pressured to listen to them.

In many revolutionary parties around the world, especially, but not
exclusively in situations of repression, a kind of loyalty towards the
leadership is called for. But it is conditional on active members electing
that leadership, or in cases of repression, at least knowing and trusting
that leadership. That is not the case here. In Merida we did not choose the
regional leadership (nor the national one for that matter), we don’t know
them, they never organise mass meetings with us, nor are they accountable
or transparent in anyway. The communication committee puts out many press
releases promoting the party, the government, and its achievements, which
is good, but it never informs the membership of who its leadership is, why
or how they were chosen, what decisions have been taken and why, or what
the state of finances are.

Had we been able to choose our candidate (and our regional leadership), it
is much more likely we would have chosen someone who is a true activist,
and who we support and are willing to campaign for.  Of the 23 state
candidates, it’s possible that in some cases we would have chosen the same
candidate as the national executive – Elias Jaua, running in Miranda state
for example, is well respected and trusted.  But the clubs of friends, the
invisible power groups within the PSUV bureaucracy, who scheme and
manoeuvre so that their own people are where they want them, would not
support that.

One woman wrote on Alexis Ramirez’s Facebook
page<https://www.facebook.com/alexisgobernador?filter=2>,
“Alexis, I support Chavez all the way, but this time I won’t accept
impositions because I don’t consider myself anyone’s sheep, and if today we
accept this selection of you ... later we’ll be exposed to similar
eventualities, so I don’t support you... let the PSUV know that the people
shouldn’t be treated in such a way, with such threats”.

A few people have suggested that perhaps if the PSUV loses these elections
in Merida, “they’ll learn”, yet this is not the first time they have made
the mistake of hand picking regional candidates from far away Caracas. It
is not in their interest to learn.

*A choice: guarantee financial resources, or guarantee a process of
participation*

Another comrade, a member of my communal council, said to me, “We have to
vote for Alexis [Ramirez] because we need to keep the government in power,
so that we can guarantee [financial] resources for Merida”.

We’ve also all been receiving pro-Alexis campaign messages to our phones,
one of which read, “Alexis is the guarantee of coordinated team work with
the national government and local governments”.

Another young comrade, a public sector worker but also a dedicated fighter,
argued that revolutionaries should vote for Alexis because, “It’s a very
critical situation... we have to defend the process, we have spent so many
decades in misery, we can’t make mistakes, we can’t go back to that”.

He made a very good point; it would be terrible if after twelve years of
reformist, but pro-Chavez governors, Merida were to go to the opposition
candidate, Lester Rodriguez, who supported the violent and armed opposition
while he was rector of the University of Los Andes (ULA), among many other
things. Yet how much should we sacrifice, in terms of debate and
participation, supposedly in order to prevent the opposition coming into
power? What are we defending exactly, if we’re campaigning for anti-worker
politicians such as the PSUV’s candidate for Bolivar, Francisco Rangel? How
will Alexis help the revolution deepen, if he’s not even accountable to the
people?  He can guarantee financial resources from the national government,
but he can’t guarantee participatory democracy.

As a group of us went visiting the neighbours in our community, talking to
the youth to see if they would get involved in an alternative cultural
activity, one young female comrade expressed her exasperation, “There is no
revolution here... where is the popular power? They don’t listen to us,
there’s no organisation”.

She was frustrated that day, and I think she knows that there is indeed a
revolution, if a problematic one. The point is, even if having Alexis as
governor guarantees that a certain amount of resources do get spent on the
people rather than diverted towards underhanded things in the case of the
opposition, under revolution that is more or less meaningless if the people
aren’t listened to and don’t have a say on just where those resources go.

Alexis has talked very little about his government plans, should he be
elected, but his proposal is available
here<http://alexisramirez.org/inicio/index.php/propuesta>.
It’s based on the national socialist plan 2013-2019 that Chavez campaigned
on, which means it’s very good: education, health, community based culture,
community generated alternative news, and so on, but which also means that
it is not tailored to the specific regional needs of Merida. If he had
listened, we could have told him that we also need pubic toilets, and to
close the centre from the unmoving and contaminating traffic, we need help
in setting up community based recycling systems and more urban agriculture,
we need a drug rehabilitation centre, and so on. Had his proposal for
government come from us and been more concrete and related to our specific
reality, that would be another reason people would have been much more
motivated to campaign and vote for the PSUV.

*Elections aren’t revolution*

Alexis and his PSUV team have been campaigning hard: there are posters and
banners everywhere, he’s done rallies and house visits in all the
parroquias of the state, he had a mass rally in Merida in the Plaza de
Toros (Bull fighting plaza), and he’s spoken at meetings of various
specific sectors of society, such as teachers, transport workers, and the
Lawyers’ Front.

But the campaign hasn’t had the same sort of energy, passion, and daily
street presence as during the campaign for Chavez for president a few
months ago. Nor is it that different, in essence, to a typical election
campaign in a country like Australia, with fairly meaningless slogans,
posters with just the candidate’s face, red t-shirts that say “Alexis’, and
relating to people as voters more than anything else.

In Miranda, revolutionaries seem to be a bit more inspired, with Jaua
offering an exciting alternative to the abandon and lack of governance,
especially of the poorer areas of Miranda, by Henrique Capriles, who
recently ran for president for the opposition.

Back then, Capriles made a great effort to resemble Chavez, taking on
revolutionary jargon – talking about “justice for the poor” and about
“improving the missions”, because he knew how strong Chavez and his cause
is. Now, Capriles has gone back to his old self, claiming that Jaua’s
proposals were written in Cuba, saying, “We aren’t going to hand Miranda
over to Castro-communism”.

Here in Merida, Lester Rodriguez has hardly done a thing. In fact, some of
us are wondering if he’s still off holidaying in Europe. His team has put
up a few posters with the banal and pathetic slogan of “Proudly Merideñan”,
and he seems to have put out a few press releases, suggesting that the PSUV
gets its funding from PDVSA, but that’s about it.

Had things have been done differently, as I’ve outlined, we could have won
easily in Merida. But despite associating Alexis with Chavez, most people
are pretty clear that they are not the same, and some people feel that the
PSUV doesn’t represent the sort of revolution we want.

The electoral battles have to be fought to protect and safeguard the
revolution, and even at times propel it, but many PSUV “leaders” don’t
understand, or don’t want to understand, that revolution is when the people
organise and take power in their communities, work places, and at the state
and national levels too. A revolution is not unelected bureaucrats signing
and stamping papers in air-conditioned officers, with the rest of us
wearing a red t-shirt with the name of one of those bureaucrats, and then
we vote for them.

Giving so much importance to these elections, calling them “critical”,
reinforces the idea that we should expect such people to do everything for
us. In reality, if the opposition wins Merida state, and any other states,
that’s a good reason to deepen the revolution, distribute more resources
directly to the people’s organisations; the communal councils, communes,
workers’ councils, the movements, the Social Production Companies (EPSs)
and so on.  That, and involving those organisations in deciding where and
how resources are distributed, is revolution. Gradually taking power away
from the structurally corrupt state governments who lack accountability
towards or consultation of the grassroots, is necessary.

*Our disorganised criticism*

Despite the current climate of labelling anyone who criticises Alexis, a
“traitor”, there has been a lot of debate and open criticism among
revolutionaries in Merida – a positive thing which shows the development
and maturity of many of those who are most active. Many people will vote
for Porras- more as a statement of criticism than support for him
particularly. Many others have written articles for alternative media site
Aporrea expressing discontent.

Unfortunately, for now, such criticism is disorganised, and hence isn’t
being converted into strong pressure.

We’re still learning and “rehearsing” revolution, as one writer, Jose
Duque<http://tracciondesangre.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/y-entonces-que-cono-es-una-revolucion.html>,
put it, “like a one year old learning to walk and falling over every half
metre”. It is natural that those with power resist change, and it’s okay
and useful that there are problems and obstacles for us to face. As we
fight them we learn, we become stronger and the revolution becomes harder
to defeat.

Looking at the behind the scene dynamics of the PSUV like this, things can
seem quite dire and worrying. But it’s important to remember how complex
this revolution is, and that in this analysis I’ve just examined one aspect
of it. On the other hand there is the urban agriculture springing up
everywhere due to grassroots initiative and government support, there are
prisoners learning to make documentaries, there’s the free dental care
three blocks from my house, there’s the youth rapping about climate change
and anti consumerism in our local plaza last Sunday, there’s the kids in
the barrio becoming dignified through democratic, alternative education,
and much more.

The levels of general political interest and understanding are increasing,
and the courage, the fight the grassroots has, its resolve, is inspiring.
These things are part of the antidote to the sour elements in the PSUV.
 ------------------------------
*Source URL (retrieved on 12/12/2012 - 8:22pm):*
http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/7548
Venezuela’s State Elections: When Winning Comes before Revolution

Dec 12th 2012, by Tamara Pearson - VENEZUELANALYSIS.COM
[image: Supporters rally for PSUV candidate for Merida, Alexis Ramirez.
Their placards say “Alexis – governor, loyalty always” (YV]

Supporters rally for PSUV candidate for Merida, Alexis Ramirez. Their
placards say “Alexis – governor, loyalty always” (YVKE Mundial).

“We’ll deal with it when the state elections are over,” a comrade said to
me.

“Ah, but then there’s the mayoral elections in April,” I replied.

Internal debate and criticism of the PSUV and its current state election
campaign, as well as proper grassroots involvement would be put off, and
put off, because in this incredibly democratic country there is always some
kind of election coming up. Yet for how long will such sacrifices be made
in the name of defeating the capitalist opposition?

Aram Aharonian, writing in
Rebelion<http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=160268&titular=sin-ch%E1vez-en-campa%F1a-cada-quien-atiende-su-juego->
last
week, was right when he argued that this Sunday’s state elections aren’t
just “one election, they’re 23 different elections”, because each state has
its own socio-economic characteristics and different types of candidates
running  -from bureaucrats, to an indigenous minister, to the military, to
the well known and the unknown.

However, all of the 23 PSUV candidates were chosen by President Hugo Chavez
and the national PSUV executive. The PSUV is a national “machine”, as we
are prone to call it here, and despite some regional differences, its state
campaigning has been conducted according to national lines and a national
strategy. So, although this article will focus on experiences in Merida
state, the problems discussed of treating PSUV members like voters rather
than activists, of isolating political parties and movements that are not
aligned to the PSUV and so on, are problems that are across the board, and
though more pertinent in this election campaign, can be said to be general
problems in the PSUV.

*Chavez’s candidates*

Not only one of the main election slogans, (here in Merida: “Alexis
Ramirez, candidate of Chavez!”) the idea that the PSUV governor candidates
are associated with, and chosen by Chavez is a key political strategy the
PSUV has been using over the last few months.

It’s a stance that suggests the party leadership are unconfident their
candidates have merit on their own, and also that the PSUV’s objectives of
socialism, justice, economic and land reform and so on, have merits on
their own. It’s a dependence on the guaranteed victory the character of
Chavez brings, but it has also been used as a way to make the PSUV the only
“real” Chavista party, and to delegitimise other revolutionary, pro-Chavez
organisations and parties which haven’t dissolved into the PSUV, such as
the Venezuelan Communist Party (PCV), the Tupumaros movement, and even
unions and the Great Patriotic Pole (GPP).

As a member of the PSUV national executive, and also head of the national
assembly, Diosdado Cabello told the press
yesterday<http://www.avn.info.ve/contenido/cabello-tenemos-posibilidades-ganar-23-gobernaciones>,
“Chavez has just one candidate in each state. We can’t impose any candidate
on our allies, but what we ask of them is that they don’t say they are
candidates of Chavez, because they aren’t.” He also made the exaggerated
claim that “Socialist candidates [PSUV] will win in all 23 states on
Sunday”.

The tactic aims at preventing a divided vote; as Chavez said before he left
for Cuba on Sunday, “Unity, Unity, Unity”, yet it is a unity that excludes
anyone who isn’t in the PSUV.

And then there is the big question of why, during a revolution, are these
candidates Chavez’s candidates and not the people’s candidates? For Merida
state, Chavez and the PSUV national executive, based far away in Caracas,
picked the unknown Alexis Ramirez for the candidate for governor. Then they
chose Rafael Ramirez, energy minister and president of PDVSA and not at all
familiar with Merida; an agricultural state and not an oil one, in charge
of the campaign. There was no consultation of PSUV membership. While
perhaps primary elections are not the best road, since many registered
members of the PSUV actually support the opposition, there was no reason
not to call state wide meetings of the active membership of the PSUV and
even other organisations, to both elect candidates and decide on
campaigning platform, and strategy.

*“Loyalty” to a person rather than to a program or to proposals*

Two more words or slogans that have been thrown around a lot during the
PSUV campaigning, both at the state and national levels, are “loyalty” and
“discipline”.  Yet the discipline doesn’t refer to good, serious,
revolutionary organisation, nor to waging a hard campaign, nor to combating
bureaucracy and corruption, but rather to unquestioning support for the
handpicked candidates.

Here in Merida, we were given Alexis Ramirez, a young geographer, a local
legislator, who in the last five years I have never seen in any of the
political marches or rallies or events, or even when Chavez spoke here a
few weeks before the presidential elections. There is also evidence that
Ramirez committed serious acts of corruption as a legislator, and it is
felt that he is largely a puppet and that there will be other people behind
the scenes, people we don’t know, governing for him.

One comrade said to me, “Those who don’t support Alexis [Ramirez], are
called traitors...I have to be “loyal” to Chavez by lying to him and
telling him his candidate is the best, no I can’t do that. This electoral
campaign has been about persecution and fear”.

The comrade said he will vote for Florencio Porras, the candidate the PCV
has put up. Porras, who was governor of Merida from 2000-2008 and is
“revolutionary light”  (that is, a pro-Chavez reformist) will likely get a
significant vote, though he won’t win.  PSUV members have stuck up posters
around the city calling Porras a traitor. One poster has modified the PCV’s
symbol, the red rooster, to be a rooster with crutches, labelled a “gallo
cojo” or lame rooster,  a message that is disrespectful of people with
disabilities. Another PSUV poster shows Lester Rodriguez, the opposition
candidate, taking off a mask that is Porras’ face.

The PSUV communication committee has also posted graphics around Facebook
with quips such as “You say you’re more revolutionary than me, but you’re
campaigning for a candidate that’s not one of Chavez’s?” and “In battle,
division is betrayal”.

Even though Chavez has gone to great pains to encourage and legitimise
criticism and self-criticism and the denouncing of bureaucracy and
corruption, clearly any PSUV bureaucrats hoping to be in power are not
going to do the same.

*The clubs of friends within the PSUV leadership*

Unfortunately, for many of the PSUV’s candidates, winning the elections
comes before real revolution (participation, grassroots organisation,
transparency, accountability etc) because that is what is more important to
them. They are using the PSUV to gain positions of power and money.

The blind “loyalty” and “discipline” they promote benefits them. Further,
once PSUV members go along with such loyalty, refusing to criticise, they
are then taken for granted and used by the PSUV bureaucracy, which will not
feel pressured to listen to them.

In many revolutionary parties around the world, especially, but not
exclusively in situations of repression, a kind of loyalty towards the
leadership is called for. But it is conditional on active members electing
that leadership, or in cases of repression, at least knowing and trusting
that leadership. That is not the case here. In Merida we did not choose the
regional leadership (nor the national one for that matter), we don’t know
them, they never organise mass meetings with us, nor are they accountable
or transparent in anyway. The communication committee puts out many press
releases promoting the party, the government, and its achievements, which
is good, but it never informs the membership of who its leadership is, why
or how they were chosen, what decisions have been taken and why, or what
the state of finances are.

Had we been able to choose our candidate (and our regional leadership), it
is much more likely we would have chosen someone who is a true activist,
and who we support and are willing to campaign for.  Of the 23 state
candidates, it’s possible that in some cases we would have chosen the same
candidate as the national executive – Elias Jaua, running in Miranda state
for example, is well respected and trusted.  But the clubs of friends, the
invisible power groups within the PSUV bureaucracy, who scheme and
manoeuvre so that their own people are where they want them, would not
support that.

One woman wrote on Alexis Ramirez’s Facebook
page<https://www.facebook.com/alexisgobernador?filter=2>,
“Alexis, I support Chavez all the way, but this time I won’t accept
impositions because I don’t consider myself anyone’s sheep, and if today we
accept this selection of you ... later we’ll be exposed to similar
eventualities, so I don’t support you... let the PSUV know that the people
shouldn’t be treated in such a way, with such threats”.

A few people have suggested that perhaps if the PSUV loses these elections
in Merida, “they’ll learn”, yet this is not the first time they have made
the mistake of hand picking regional candidates from far away Caracas. It
is not in their interest to learn.

*A choice: guarantee financial resources, or guarantee a process of
participation*

Another comrade, a member of my communal council, said to me, “We have to
vote for Alexis [Ramirez] because we need to keep the government in power,
so that we can guarantee [financial] resources for Merida”.

We’ve also all been receiving pro-Alexis campaign messages to our phones,
one of which read, “Alexis is the guarantee of coordinated team work with
the national government and local governments”.

Another young comrade, a public sector worker but also a dedicated fighter,
argued that revolutionaries should vote for Alexis because, “It’s a very
critical situation... we have to defend the process, we have spent so many
decades in misery, we can’t make mistakes, we can’t go back to that”.

He made a very good point; it would be terrible if after twelve years of
reformist, but pro-Chavez governors, Merida were to go to the opposition
candidate, Lester Rodriguez, who supported the violent and armed opposition
while he was rector of the University of Los Andes (ULA), among many other
things. Yet how much should we sacrifice, in terms of debate and
participation, supposedly in order to prevent the opposition coming into
power? What are we defending exactly, if we’re campaigning for anti-worker
politicians such as the PSUV’s candidate for Bolivar, Francisco Rangel? How
will Alexis help the revolution deepen, if he’s not even accountable to the
people?  He can guarantee financial resources from the national government,
but he can’t guarantee participatory democracy.

As a group of us went visiting the neighbours in our community, talking to
the youth to see if they would get involved in an alternative cultural
activity, one young female comrade expressed her exasperation, “There is no
revolution here... where is the popular power? They don’t listen to us,
there’s no organisation”.

She was frustrated that day, and I think she knows that there is indeed a
revolution, if a problematic one. The point is, even if having Alexis as
governor guarantees that a certain amount of resources do get spent on the
people rather than diverted towards underhanded things in the case of the
opposition, under revolution that is more or less meaningless if the people
aren’t listened to and don’t have a say on just where those resources go.

Alexis has talked very little about his government plans, should he be
elected, but his proposal is available
here<http://alexisramirez.org/inicio/index.php/propuesta>.
It’s based on the national socialist plan 2013-2019 that Chavez campaigned
on, which means it’s very good: education, health, community based culture,
community generated alternative news, and so on, but which also means that
it is not tailored to the specific regional needs of Merida. If he had
listened, we could have told him that we also need pubic toilets, and to
close the centre from the unmoving and contaminating traffic, we need help
in setting up community based recycling systems and more urban agriculture,
we need a drug rehabilitation centre, and so on. Had his proposal for
government come from us and been more concrete and related to our specific
reality, that would be another reason people would have been much more
motivated to campaign and vote for the PSUV.

*Elections aren’t revolution*

Alexis and his PSUV team have been campaigning hard: there are posters and
banners everywhere, he’s done rallies and house visits in all the
parroquias of the state, he had a mass rally in Merida in the Plaza de
Toros (Bull fighting plaza), and he’s spoken at meetings of various
specific sectors of society, such as teachers, transport workers, and the
Lawyers’ Front.

But the campaign hasn’t had the same sort of energy, passion, and daily
street presence as during the campaign for Chavez for president a few
months ago. Nor is it that different, in essence, to a typical election
campaign in a country like Australia, with fairly meaningless slogans,
posters with just the candidate’s face, red t-shirts that say “Alexis’, and
relating to people as voters more than anything else.

In Miranda, revolutionaries seem to be a bit more inspired, with Jaua
offering an exciting alternative to the abandon and lack of governance,
especially of the poorer areas of Miranda, by Henrique Capriles, who
recently ran for president for the opposition.

Back then, Capriles made a great effort to resemble Chavez, taking on
revolutionary jargon – talking about “justice for the poor” and about
“improving the missions”, because he knew how strong Chavez and his cause
is. Now, Capriles has gone back to his old self, claiming that Jaua’s
proposals were written in Cuba, saying, “We aren’t going to hand Miranda
over to Castro-communism”.

Here in Merida, Lester Rodriguez has hardly done a thing. In fact, some of
us are wondering if he’s still off holidaying in Europe. His team has put
up a few posters with the banal and pathetic slogan of “Proudly Merideñan”,
and he seems to have put out a few press releases, suggesting that the PSUV
gets its funding from PDVSA, but that’s about it.

Had things have been done differently, as I’ve outlined, we could have won
easily in Merida. But despite associating Alexis with Chavez, most people
are pretty clear that they are not the same, and some people feel that the
PSUV doesn’t represent the sort of revolution we want.

The electoral battles have to be fought to protect and safeguard the
revolution, and even at times propel it, but many PSUV “leaders” don’t
understand, or don’t want to understand, that revolution is when the people
organise and take power in their communities, work places, and at the state
and national levels too. A revolution is not unelected bureaucrats signing
and stamping papers in air-conditioned officers, with the rest of us
wearing a red t-shirt with the name of one of those bureaucrats, and then
we vote for them.

Giving so much importance to these elections, calling them “critical”,
reinforces the idea that we should expect such people to do everything for
us. In reality, if the opposition wins Merida state, and any other states,
that’s a good reason to deepen the revolution, distribute more resources
directly to the people’s organisations; the communal councils, communes,
workers’ councils, the movements, the Social Production Companies (EPSs)
and so on.  That, and involving those organisations in deciding where and
how resources are distributed, is revolution. Gradually taking power away
from the structurally corrupt state governments who lack accountability
towards or consultation of the grassroots, is necessary.

*Our disorganised criticism*

Despite the current climate of labelling anyone who criticises Alexis, a
“traitor”, there has been a lot of debate and open criticism among
revolutionaries in Merida – a positive thing which shows the development
and maturity of many of those who are most active. Many people will vote
for Porras- more as a statement of criticism than support for him
particularly. Many others have written articles for alternative media site
Aporrea expressing discontent.

Unfortunately, for now, such criticism is disorganised, and hence isn’t
being converted into strong pressure.

We’re still learning and “rehearsing” revolution, as one writer, Jose
Duque<http://tracciondesangre.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/y-entonces-que-cono-es-una-revolucion.html>,
put it, “like a one year old learning to walk and falling over every half
metre”. It is natural that those with power resist change, and it’s okay
and useful that there are problems and obstacles for us to face. As we
fight them we learn, we become stronger and the revolution becomes harder
to defeat.

Looking at the behind the scene dynamics of the PSUV like this, things can
seem quite dire and worrying. But it’s important to remember how complex
this revolution is, and that in this analysis I’ve just examined one aspect
of it. On the other hand there is the urban agriculture springing up
everywhere due to grassroots initiative and government support, there are
prisoners learning to make documentaries, there’s the free dental care
three blocks from my house, there’s the youth rapping about climate change
and anti consumerism in our local plaza last Sunday, there’s the kids in
the barrio becoming dignified through democratic, alternative education,
and much more.

The levels of general political interest and understanding are increasing,
and the courage, the fight the grassroots has, its resolve, is inspiring.
These things are part of the antidote to the sour elements in the PSUV.
 ------------------------------
*Source URL (retrieved on 12/12/2012 - 8:22pm):*
http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/7548


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to