[image: Hands Off Venezuela]*Hands Off Venezuela *@
*HOVcampaign*<https://twitter.com/HOVcampaign>

VIDEO: Chavez in London 2008 "I'm a socialist, come close and I will infect
you" http://www. youtube.com / watch? v = ZQ1Zkk o8xnw
...<http://t.co/KCHEp5UCEa> thanks
HOV http://www.youtube.com / watch? v = azK30o cB1rI
...<http://t.co/uWKiJHwxq6>



President Chavez reaffirms opposition to
capitalism<http://www.marxist.com/chavez-opposition-capitalism010305.htm>
Written by Jorge MartinTuesday, 01 March 2005
[image: 
Print]<http://www.marxist.com/chavez-opposition-capitalism010305/print.htm>[image:
E-mail]<http://www.marxist.com/component/option,com_mailto/link,059bda699ca7d2bbffaa218accdf1a647daaa940/tmpl,component/>
 “I am convinced that the path to a new, better and possible world is not
capitalism, the path is socialism”. With this clear statement on his weekly
TV programme “Alo Presidente,” Chavez reaffirmed his point of view that
socialism is the only way forward to solve the problems of inequality,
misery and poverty that millions face in Venezuela and the world today.

*I have said it already, I am convinced that the way to build a new and
better world is not capitalism. Capitalism leads us straight to hell *
(Hugo Chavez)

“I am convinced that the path to a new, better and possible world is not
capitalism, the path is socialism”. With this clear statement on his weekly
TV programme “Alo Presidente,” Chavez reaffirmed his point of view that
socialism is the only way forward to solve the problems of inequality,
misery and poverty that millions face in Venezuela and the world today.

He added: “I have said it already, I am convinced that the way to build a
new and better world is not capitalism. Capitalism leads us straight to
hell.” The President had already made similar statements speaking at the World
Social Forum in Brazil<http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/chavez_speech_wsf.htm> at
the end of January.

Last Sunday’s Alo Presidente programme was broadcast from Cocorote in the
mainly agricultural state of Yaracuy. Chavez made an appeal to open a
discussion about the question of socialism within his own party, the
Movement for the Fifth Republic (MVR), and within the Bolivarian
revolutionary movement in general.

He explained how this conviction came after many years of struggle: “I am
convinced, at this stage of my life – I am now 50 years old – after six
years as a president, after nearly 30 years of political struggle, since
1977, when I had the idea of taking an oath from a small group of fellow
countrymen, soldiers, to create the first nucleus – there were only about 5
of us then – of what later became the MBR-200 [Bolivarian Revolutionary
Movement 200] ... after many readings, debates, discussions and many
travels around the world, etc., I am convinced, and I think that this
conviction will be for the rest of my life, that the path to a new, better
and possible world, is not capitalism, the path is socialism, that is the
path: socialism, socialism”.

The public cheered and applauded the speech. The reaction of the live
audience to Chavez’s words shows the enormous potential that there is in
the Venezuelan revolutionary movement for the ideas of socialist
transformation. This is the result of the practical experience of the last
16 years of struggle. February 27th marked the 16th anniversary of the
“Caracazo” uprising, which was to transform Venezuela’s political life. And
in particular the last six years since Chavez was elected in December 1998
have had an impact.

Hugo Chavez’s political evolution has not proceeded in a straight line, as
he explained himself on Friday 25th, at a Summit on Social Debt in Caracas.
He honestly pointed out that he had toyed with the idea of a “Third Way” as
a solution to capitalism: “a third way, capitalism with a human face,
trying to give the monster a mask.” But he concluded: “this mask has fallen
to the floor shattered by reality”.

When he came to power in 1998 Chavez did not start from a socialist
standpoint. He was committed to solving the problems of inequality,
poverty, and misery of millions of Venezuelans. But he initially thought
that could be done within the limits of the capitalist system. His
government actually has gone out of its way not to violate private property
rights of big landowners, bankers and businessmen.

The contradiction from the very beginning was precisely that any attempt to
seriously address these problems would clash head on with the interests of
the oligarchy, a tight coalition of interests of landowners, bankers,
capitalists and the state bureaucracy, completely subordinated to the
wishes of US imperialism.

Since President Chavez was seriously committed to solving these problems,
the oligarchy, en masse, went over to the side of armed insurrection
against the democratically elected government. This shows the extremely
parasitical nature of the Venezuelan oligarchy (a feature it shares with
the ruling classes of all capitalist countries in the so-called Third
World). They organised the military coup of April 2002, the oil industry
sabotage and bosses’ lockout of December 2002, the bringing of Colombian
paramilitaries to Caracas and the fascist provocation of *la guarimba* in
February 2004, the presidential recall referendum in August 2004, and so on.

It has been this rich experience of the revolutionary movement, faced with
the constant provocations of the ruling class, that has pushed Chavez and
many in the Bolivarian revolutionary movement to draw the conclusion that
“Within the framework of capitalism it is impossible to solve the
challenges of fighting against poverty, misery, exploitation,
inequality” (Venezuela’s
elections: defeat for the opposition, advance for the Bolivarian
movement<http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/venezuela_elections_defeat_opposition.htm>),
as Chavez himself explained during the October regional election campaign.

This dynamic of action and reaction of the Venezuelan revolution reminds us
in a very powerful way of the first years of the Cuban revolution. In a
process of attack and counter-attack, the leadership of the Cuban
revolution, which did not start with the intention of overthrowing
capitalism, was forced, in order to solve the most pressing needs of the
masses, to overthrow capitalism.

This is one side of the question, but there is another side. Chavez is a
man who devours books and has an enormous thirst for ideas. This is no
accident. It reflects the pressing need to find a way out of the problems
faced by the revolution. That is why Hugo Chavez has been reading Marxist
literature, which has undoubtedly had an influence on him. He has publicly
praised Alan Woods’ book *Reason in Revolt* on several occasions. He has
particularly quoted the section that deals with the molecular process of
the revolution, a section that is particularly relevant to the stage the
Bolivarian Revolution is now passing through.

Even more relevant is Trotsky’s *Permanent Revolution*, which he bought
from the comrades of El Militante at the meeting with the workers in
Madrid<http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/meeting_chavez_workers_madrid.htm>,
and which he has also recommended enthusiastically. The main thesis of this
book is precisely the fact that none of the tasks of the national
democratic revolution can be carried out by the bourgeoisie in backward
capitalist countries, since they have arrived too late on the scene of
history, and that these tasks can only be solved by the working class
through the struggle for socialism.

The central idea of the theory of Permanent Revolution is that in colonial
and ex-colonial countries the struggle for the bourgeois democratic tasks,
if it is pursued to the end, must lead (in an uninterrupted or permanent
manner) to the socialist revolution. But that is only half of the theory.
The other main idea in the Permanent Revolution is that revolution cannot
be limited within the borders of one country, but must spread
internationally as the only guarantee of its victory. Chavez has also
commented favourably upon this idea, stating publicly that Trotsky was
right against Stalin on this question, and that the Bolivarian Revolution
must spread to other countries in order to succeed.

At the Summit on Social Debt, he said that so far in six years of
government, “we have not defined our model as socialist”. He added: “I am
saying this in my personal capacity, to contribute to the debate, to open
the discussion within the parties that support the revolution”. But his
position is clear: “if it is not capitalism, then, what is it? I have no
doubts, it is socialism”. On Alo Presidente he stressed the need for a
debate on this question: “let’s discuss, we are not afraid of ideas”.

In previous occasions Chavez has made it clear that what is needed is to
study the original ideas of socialism, which have been distorted by
Stalinism. “Which socialism, of the many that there are? We could think
that none of those that have existed, though they represent experience,
achievements, advancement in many cases, we will have to invent it, this is
why this debate is so important, we must invent 21st century socialism.”

At the end of his Alo Presidente programme he insisted that the kind of
socialism he is thinking about is based on “revolutionary democracy”: “all
of this, the urban land committees, the endogenous growth nucleus, the
‘Into the neighbourhood’ mission, the Housing Mission... all of these are
tools for the building of socialism, we must move away from capitalism”.

Chavez has said on many occasions that the only way to end poverty is, “to
give power to the poor”. That idea is basically correct, but like all the
other ideas expressed by Chavez, it must be given a concrete content.
Genuine socialism can only be based on the democracy of workers’ committees
in the factories, workplaces and working class communities, soldiers’
committees and peasants’ committees. This was actually carried into
practice by the Bolshevik Party under the leadership of Lenin and Trotsky
in Russia in 1917, although it was later betrayed and distorted by Stalin.

Chavez’s latest statements about socialism come after the Zamoran decrees
to speed up land reform were passed in January and the expropriation of
Venepal, also in January. The land reform decrees have already been used to
take over part of El Charcote ranch (owned by British multimillionaire Lord
Vestey). Venepal is now jointly owned by the state and the workers and run
on the basis of a structure in which the Workers’ Assembly is the supreme
body. The workers at the Constructora Nacional de Valvulas (the CNV makes
valves for the oil industry), also abandoned by its owners, have now
re-launched their struggle and are also demanding nationalisation under
workers’ control.

It is clear that the Bolivarian Revolution now stands at the turning point.
If it is to go forward, it must now grasp the nettle, confront the
oligarchy and carry out the expropriation of the land, the banks and the
big enterprises that remain in private hands. In order to avoid the
abomination of bureaucracy and totalitarianism, it must develop a
democratic model – not the corrupt pseudo-democracy of the bourgeoisie but
a new model of socialist democracy that means that power is firmly in the
hands of the workers and peasants.

Some people say that the Bolivarian model must not take its ideas from
other countries, especially Europe. If that means that the Bolivarian
Revolution must not slavishly import foreign models, we agree. The
Venezuelan revolution has its own character, personality and historical
traditions and the masses have already demonstrated their colossal capacity
for creativity and inventiveness.

But if it signifies a national limitedness and narrow mindedness, that is
bad and has nothing in common with the true ideas of Bolivar. Let us not
forget that Simon Bolivar based himself on a very European model – that of
the French Revolution. In the same way the modern descendants of Bolivar
will seek to learn from other revolutions. After all, we do not need to
re-invent the wheel. Revolution did not end with Bolivar, and the
revolutionary ideology was later perfected and placed on a scientific basis
by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky, and other revolutionary thinkers.

The modern Bolivarians will be as open to genuinely revolutionary ideas
from other countries as was their founder. It is no accident that, along
with Bolivar and the other heroes of the Latin American revolutionary
tradition, Hugo Chavez quotes the works of the great Russian revolutionary,
Leon Trotsky. The modern Bolivarians will repeat the experience of the
Russian Revolution, but on a higher level, and filling it with a genuinely
Venezuelan and Latin American content. In this way they will preserve the
best of the old to produce something genuinely new and original.

Above all, it is necessary to commence the debate on ideas that President
Chavez has called for. The Marxist tendency represented in Venezuela by the
Revolutionary Marxist Current, and internationally by El Militante and
Marxist.com will participate actively in this debate. This is the only way
in which we can develop a layer of revolutionary cadres, integrated in the
Bolivarian Movement, capable of providing the necessary guidance in the
decisive battles against capitalism.

The opening of the debate about socialism represents a decisive turning
point in the Venezuelan revolution and it has worldwide implications. For
the first time in many years, the leader of a mass revolutionary movement
is drawing the correct conclusions from his own experience. He has come to
the conclusion that capitalism cannot solve the problems of the masses and
that socialism is the only way forward. That should be warmly welcomed by
all sincere revolutionaries. Now what is needed is to convert words into
deeds!


[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