FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution Wins the Battle, But is It Losing the War?

Even before Venezuela’s May 20 presidential vote had taken place, the United States —headed by a president who lost the popular vote in an electoral system that systematically disenfranchises millions of poor and non-white voters — rejected the elections as “neither free nor fair”.

The Lima Group, a coalition of 13 right-wing Latin American countries plus Canada, also refused to recognise the results. Among its members are:

* Brazil, whose unelected president was installed in an unconstitutional parliamentary coup;

* Honduras, which after a 2009 coup had its president re-elected last year, despite the constitution only allowing for single terms, in elections deemed so fraudulent that no head of state dared attend his inauguration;

* Mexico, where close to 100 candidates, party officials or their relatives have been assassinated during the current presidential election campaign; and

* Colombia, where the murder of political activists is an almost daily occurrence and candidates have had to pull out of the upcoming election due to death threats.

Canada, after denying Venezuelans their right to participate in these elections at the Venezuelan Embassy and consulates, said the vote was “anti-democratic”.

The corporate media simply echoed this message, without the slightest attempt to back up its claims of fraud.

They all refused to accept a basic, undeniable fact: that in the face of everything thrown at them — sanctions, threats of military intervention and boycott campaigns, to list just a few — more than 6.2 million Venezuelans voted for incumbent president Nicolas Maduro, thereby ensuring his victory with 67.8% of votes cast.

Legitimate criticisms can be made about some of the circumstances surrounding the elections — for example, the banning of certain candidates and parties and the misuse of state resources (criticisms that can be made about just about any elections, certainly in Latin America). However, no evidence has been presented to show the final vote count was fraudulent.

Even Maduro’s two main rivals, while criticising the overall process, have not questioned the final vote tally.

What’s more, a strong case can be made that had the main opposition parties decided not to boycott the elections and supported a single candidate, they would most likely have won. Even Maduro accepted as much in his election night victory speech.

But such an orderly transition is not what Venezuela’s opposition, starting with Washington, has its sights set on.

As talk of “military options”, coups and transitional governments become ever more public, it is clear that Venezuela’s enemies have no interest in democracy.

What’s more, they have no qualms in actively worsening an already dire situation to achieve their anti-democratic goal, as evidenced by the new round of sanctions imposed on Venezuela.

British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson admitted as much, saying of the new sanctions, “It’s very sad because obviously the downside of sanctions is that they can affect the population that you don’t want to suffer,” before adding, “things have got to get worse before they get better — and we may have to tighten the economic screw on Venezuela.”

What Maduro’s opponents seek is a scenario where they can eliminate all traces of the Bolivarian Revolution, the political project of Venezuela’s popular classes that has sought to empower the people and take the country in an anti-capitalist direction.

This would require more than just an electoral victory: it would require a thorough purge of the Venezuelan state and the denial of political rights to a large section of society that supports the revolutionary project, which remains the largest single force in politics.

In this sense, the attempts to delegitimise democratic elections are simply part of paving the way for an undemocratic, and almost certainly bloody, outcome.

Against this, the 6.2 million plus votes for Maduro shows that the Bolivarian Revolution continues to count upon an important social base of support. This social base was strong enough to win this electoral battle — but it is seemingly weakening in the face of the ongoing economic war being waged against it.

Maduro’s vote was not only down from Chavez’s 2012 vote of more than 8 million, it also represents a decline of almost 1.5 million votes from his own 2013 result. This decline is greater still if we consider that there are 1.6 million more enrolled voters today than in 2013. That is, the pro-revolution vote has fallen from 43.4% of the voting population to 30% in the past six years.

Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that many who voted for Maduro this time around may not be willing to do so again if the government doesn’t tackle the dire situation it has attributed to the economic war.

Venezuelan intellectual Luis Britto Garcia, in an interview with LaIguana.TV on May 21, noted that Maduro had obtained an important victory. He said it dispelled the argument that the Bolivarian Revolution is simply a clientalist movement, given that despite all the hardships Venezuelans are facing they had voted for the revolution for a fourth time in a row in less than a year.

He added that the government now had “no excuses”, as these electoral victories had handed it control of a majority of governorships, mayoralties, the presidency and the National Constituent Assembly, which is entrusted with reforming the country’s constitution.

“So this is the moment for all these powers to implement the indispensable measures to confront the economic war that has caused so much damage to the Venezuelan people,” he said. The leaders of the Bolivarian Revolution “have in their hands an accumulation of power that obliges them to take urgent measures because the people cannot take it anymore”.

José González, a young supporter of the Bolivarian Revolution speaking to BBC Mundo before the elections put it more succinctly: “We will give [Maduro] a vote of confidence. If this doesn’t work, that is it … if the country does not improve the people will come out onto the streets”.

More articles by:

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

April 18, 2019
Gerald Sussman
Russiagate is Dead! Long Live Russiagate!
Lance Olsen
Perverse Housing Policy Perverts Forest Policy
Richard Ward
All Will be Punished
Jonathan Cook
Annexation of West Bank May Provide Key to Unlocking Netanyahu’s Legal Troubles
Judith Deutsch
People Music: Malignant Phallic Narcissism v. Being Ordinary
Jan Oberg
The Iran Floods and US Sanctions: 10 Million at Risk, But Who Cares?
Manuel E. Yepe
Assange: Between Gratitude and Betrayal
Ralph Nader
Children’s Moral Power Can Challenge Corporate Power on Climate Crisis
ADRIAN KUZMINSKI
Your Check is in the Mail
Binoy Kampmark
The European Union and Refugees in the Mediterranean
Arnold R. Isaacs
Looking Back at 1919: Immigration, Race, and Women’s Rights, Then and Now
Andrew Moss
Immigration and the Shock Doctrine
Michael Howard
Assange and the Cowardice of Power
Jesse Jackson
Making Wall Street Pay for the Financial Crisis
Mel Gurtov
At Risk—the Idea of America
April 17, 2019
James Bovard
Washington’s Biggest Fairy Tale: “Truth Will Out”
Yoav Litvin
The Ilhan Omar Gambit: Anti-Semitism as a Reactionary Political Tool
Evaggelos Vallianatos
Hawai’i in Trouble
Vijay Prashad
To Ola Bini, a Political Prisoner Caught Up in the Assange Debacle
Hans Muilerman and Jonathan Latham
EU Threatens to Legalize Human Harm From Pesticides
Binoy Kampmark
Delegitimising Journalism: The Effort to Relabel Julian Assange
Jack Rasmus
Trump Whacks the Middle Class
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
The Burning Cathedral and the Dead Turtle
Kenneth Surin
Insurgencies in Malaysia and Vietnam: Boyhood Reflections
Rev. William Alberts
Opening Tombs and Resurrecting Lives
Tom Engelhardt
How the U.S. Military Feeds at the Terror Trough
Norman Solomon
The Toxic Lure of “Guns and Butter”
George Wuerthner
How to Stop Grazing on Public Lands: Buy Out the Permits
George Ochenski
Vote-Trading for Big Coal
John Stanton
The Price of Participating in Society is the Sacrifice of Privacy and Self
April 16, 2019
Richard Rubenstein
Julian and Martin: Reflections on the Arrest of Assange
Geoff Dutton
Talking Trash: Unfortunate Truths About Recycling
Kenn Orphan
A Land Uncharted: the Persecution of Julian Assange
Patrick Cockburn
Netanyahu’s Victory in Israel Tells Us About the Balance of Power in the Middle East
Robert Fisk
No More Excuses: Israeli Voters Have Chosen a Country that Will Mirror the Brutal Regimes of its Arab Neighbours
Jonah Raskin
The French (Bread) Connection in a Bourgeois California Town
Denis Rogatyuk
The Ordeal of Julian Assange
David Swanson
Exporting Dictators
Ted Rall
Self-Censorship is Credibility Suicide
Robert Koehler
War Crimes and National Security
Lee Ballinger
None Dare Call It Fascism
April 15, 2019
Bruce Neuburger
The Border, Trumpian Madness and the Clash of Demographics
Patrick Cockburn
Calling Assange a Narcissist Misses the Point
Conn Hallinan
Diego Garcia: The “Unsinkable Carrier” Springs a Leak
Dan Corjescu
State of Apocalyptic Nature: A Contract with Gaia
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail