• Monthly
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $other
  • use PayPal

ONE WEEK TO DOUBLE YOUR DONATION!

A generous CounterPuncher has offered a $25,000 matching grant. So for this week only, whatever you can donate will be doubled up to $25,000! If you have the means, please donate! If you already have done so, thank you for your support. All contributions are tax-deductible.
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Why Do Bush and Kerry Fear Hugo Chavez?

The US government and Presidential candidate John Kerry have announced that President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, is a threat to the United States. What is most ironic is that while using a different framework through which to analyze this statement, this is true. The vision of Hugo Chavez and the strong community organizing of the Venezuelan people little by little destroys the corrupt, imperialist, and repressive vision and practice of the US government and its capacity to intervene in the affairs of the people, minimizing their efforts to control the beloved nation called Venezuela. In fact, it transforms their framework while resisting it- that is why recently Colin Powell announced after the referendum that the US, while in “disagreement” over policies and ideology, will find ways in which to cooperate with the Venezuelan government. The work of the people makes it even more impossible for the US government to execute its plan to rule by a foreign hand, buying officials within while foreign banks come to partake in the fruits of the capitalist machine of globalization that has destroyed so many lives and so many countries. However, they continue to sing the cry of threat and danger, their fingers pointed toward Hugo Chavez, the leader of the resistance against neoliberalism and imperialism.

The importance of Venezuela as a political theme has increased as the long awaited elections near in November in the United States. Of course, both candidates George Bush and John Kerry are so similar that really there is no difference; they are figures representing the same interests of domination. The differences over which they continue to squabble are miniscule, yet magnified in an effort by the private media to create more drama and to maintain the power of the two-party system. They fundamentally agree in many areas, but one in which they both agree particularly strongly: the threat of Hugo Chavez and the Venezuelan people. Of course strategically, Venezuela means one thing to them- oil. They don’t see a people, a beautiful land rich with history and culture and principled politics from which they could most certainly learn- they see dollars and an opportunity, under the right conditions, to snag the resources that belong to another people. But there’s just one problem- the determination and struggle of a people and a revolution that has already firmly planted its roots, with a leader that will never ever sell his people nor his country nor their sovereignty as a people. What’s more, is that the beautiful and fierce example of the Bolivarian Revolution doesn’t just remain closed within the borders of Venezuela. Each day it grows and extends itself throughout Latin America, in Ecuador, in Bolivia, in Brazil, in Argentina, blossoming and creating a more united people and a consciousness of the power possible in the roots of community over empire. This is the threat which they actually describe, the threat against them themselves and their project to conquer the world.

Of course, what they mean to say is that Chavez is a terrorist threat, that he ideologically supports terrorists through his anti-imperialist resistance, which means danger for the US homeland in the light of the September 11th attacks. But in reality, it is that little by little, this resistance, in combination with the empowerment of the Venezuelan people, damages their own terrorist campaign and domination, and that they fear that this process will empower and inspire other oppressed people to rise up, to organize, to reclaim their humanity and their society. Because no longer does it work to pour billions of dollars into opposition groups in hopes of generating another coup, as they did through the NED, the National Endowment for Democracy, a right-wing group that in the name of democracy funds opposition groups that promote US imperialist interests in other countries throughout the world. This was one of the great lessons of the August 15th referendum, that the power already belongs to the people and it is impossible to take that away. That no longer can billions of imported dollars save your oligarchy. The people have sung their message. They have said, “No Volverán!”, that they won’t go back. And this is the threat.

KATHERINE LAHEY is a student at the University of California. She is spending six months in Venezuela studying the revolutionary process. She can be reached at: lunazul_77@hotmail.com

 

More articles by:
bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
Weekend Edition
October 18, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Anthony DiMaggio
Trump as the “Anti-War” President: on Misinformation in American Political Discourse
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Where’s the Beef With Billionaires?
Rob Urie
Capitalism and the Violence of Environmental Decline
Paul Street
Bernie in the Deep Shit: Dismal Dem Debate Reflections
Andrew Levine
What’s So Awful About Foreign Interference?
T.J. Coles
Boris Johnson’s Brexit “Betrayal”: Elect a Clown, Expect a Pie in Your Face
Joseph Natoli
Trump on the March
Ashley Smith
Stop the Normalization of Concentration Camps
Pete Dolack
The Fight to Overturn the Latest Corporate Coup at Pacifica Has Only Begun
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Russophobia at Democratic Party Debate
Chris Gilbert
Forward! A Week of Protest in Catalonia
Daniel Beaumont
Pressing Done Here: Syria, Iraq and “Informed Discussion”
Daniel Warner
Greta the Disturber
M. G. Piety
“Grim Positivism” vs. Truthiness in Biography
John Kendall Hawkins
Journey to the Unknown Interior of (You)
Christopher Fons – Conor McMullen
The Centrism of Elizabeth Warren
Nino Pagliccia
Peace Restored in Ecuador, But is trust?
Rebecca Gordon
Extorting Ukraine is Bad Enough But Trump Has Done Much Worse
Kathleen Wallace
Trump Can’t Survive Where the Bats and Moonlight Laugh
Clark T. Scott
Cross-eyed, Fanged and Horned
Eileen Appelbaum
The PR Campaign to Hide the Real Cause of those Sky-High Surprise Medical Bills
Olivia Alperstein
Nuclear Weapons are an Existential Threat
Colin Todhunter
Asia-Pacific Trade Deal: Trading Away Indian Agriculture?
Sarah Anderson
Where is “Line Worker Barbie”?
Brian Cloughley
Yearning to Breathe Free
Jill Richardson
Why are LGBTQ Rights Even a Debate?
Jesse Jackson
What I Learn While Having Lunch at Cook County Jail
Kathy Kelly
Death, Misery and Bloodshed in Yemen
Maximilian Werner
Leadership Lacking for Wolf Protection
Arshad Khan
The Turkish Gambit
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Rare Wildflower vs. Mining Company
Dianne Woodward
Race Against Time (and For Palestinians)
Norman Ball
Wall Street Sees the Light of Domestic Reindustrialization
Ramzy Baroud
The Last Lifeline: The Real Reason Behind Abbas’ Call for Elections
Binoy Kampmark
African Swine Fever Does Its Worst
Nicky Reid
Screwing Over the Kurds: An All-American Pastime
Louis Proyect
“Our Boys”: a Brutally Honest Film About the Consequences of the Occupation
Coco Das
#OUTNOW
Cesar Chelala
Donald Trump vs. William Shakespeare
Ron Jacobs
Calling the Kettle White: Ishmael Reed Unbound
Stephen Cooper
Scientist vs. Cooper: The Interview, Round 3 
Susan Block
How “Hustlers” Hustles Us
Charles R. Larson
Review: Elif Shafak’s “10 Minutes 38 Seconds in This Strange World”
David Yearsley
Sunset Songs
October 17, 2019
Steve Early
The Irishman Cometh: Teamster History Hits the Big Screen (Again)
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail