Thus, the power lost in the parliamentary elections. Try to figure out why this happened and what are the future prospects for the Bolivarian revolution. I already wrote about the fact that it’s not so much the opposition’s victory, much defeat and the weakness of the government. What are the pitfalls is fraught with a new alignment of forces? We have more say about right-wing victory in France, and Venezuela for some reason are silent. Let’s try to get through this information and smokescreen of silence:
The victory of democracy.
First I would like to mention the democratic and open nature of the upcoming election. Many times, the Venezuelan government criticized the fact that the election results “painted”, – it is impossible, they say, as many times in a row to win. But twenty electoral campaigns in 17 years, the government lost only twice: in 2009 in a referendum on amendments to the Constitution and the current election. I wrote a lot in previous posts about the automated voting system, which many in the world consider the standard of conduct of elections. In this system, the duplicated ballot – a voter votes as paper (newsletters) and electronic means. This allows you to check the results accurate to one ballot. But no, many still had doubts. Now they have vanished. Power lost, with a devastating result. Indeed, to prove that you are alive, you have to die and get a death certificate! Now you, doubter, was convinced that no fraud was not? There never has been. Nothing to do with the present vote, nor in the previous one. Neither one of twenty.
And this, for all the bitterness of defeat is really a victory of democracy. Jokes aside: let’s imagine that the voting results would have aroused the slightest doubt. That would at least portray distorting the will of the voters. What would happen then? It is clear that: “guarimba” – riots – worse than two years ago, when the presidential election with a minimum margin win Maduro. Explosions power lines – they had already started before the election. And even armed rebellion in the border States with the subsequent intervention.
But the government lost. Try to understand what it means and why it happened.
The new arrangement in Parliament.
In fact, the Bolivarian Republic lost one branch. I will notice that, contrary to the bourgeois standard of the three branches (or three “authorities”), in Venezuela there are five of them – Executive, legislative, judicial, electoral and the most interesting – the people’s (system of municipalities). Now, the legislative power belongs to the opposition. In the previous Parliament – the national Assembly – the United socialist party of Venezuela (PSUV) had 98 votes. In the next Parliament more than reversed: the “Table of democratic unity” will belong to 107 seats. This qualified majority of 2/3 of the mandates.
The opposition will be able to initiate and pass laws, including the main (organic) to appoint and remove officials, including Ministers, currently the opposition is attributed to itself by 112 votes, but it’s pitchfork on the air. If she gets that amount, to convene a Constitutional Assembly to change the Basic law. So its potential is very broad. “Calms” only one – the opposition was not and no clear program. Having the broadest powers, she refused to behave like a bull in a China shop and naponimaet such laws, which remind her of voters (about. below).
From the outset, Maduro spoke of the radicalization of the Bolivarian revolution. If Chavez was a master of compromise and was able to negotiate with the opposition, Maduro since the election chose the path of radicalism. But we can say that by and large this is left radicalism more than in words. Against the opposition continued soft and a compromise policy. Yeah, was imprisoned opposition leader Leopoldo lópez, but again why? Because the authorities were afraid that he would be killed “” and this will cause political crisis in the country. By and large even the arrest was a compromise step! Now Lopez raised by the opposition on the shield and slowly coasting.
Had Maduro radicalization and against the government itself. It has been infiltrated by corrupt officials and Nouveau riche. No loud “rapping” when Maduro was not, was not carried out a purge of the Socialist party. Again for fear that it will destabilize and split the party. I have not once come across this type of argument: I am a revolutionary and chavist, but I don’t vote for corrupt officials.
Thus, part of chavista votes went to the opposition or they did not come to vote at all. (Of course, this behavior cannot be admitted as civil adults. For example, in the power of “entrenched” corruption. Although how do you know if your experience is one thing, but if from the bourgeois media – why do you believe them? But let’s say. So bring them to clean water, fail – try again and again, and vote in the elections at least for the lesser evil, but do not give power to the enemy class. Surely under his rule, corruption will be less? Corrupt you pursue – and with other authorities to prosecute will be less? You lack legal capacity – and the right ones will present them to you on a silver platter?)
Social policy of the government was largely down to populist practice of allowances and subsidies. Housing, food, household goods, transportation – all were subsidized by the government and sold at minimal prices, and acted as the main instrument of domestic policy. Yes, social shifts are large, but they turned against the government. Recently in a conversation with a friend I heard an interesting idea, which I will share. As a result, social policy has expanded the middle class. Many have been lifted out of poverty and moved into the group of the middle class. But they have adopted and the public consciousness, including political. A kind of Venezuelan (and Argentinian, and Brazilian) Ivana, not remembering kinship. And this is no accident. Not earned, not conquered you and your comrades in the class struggle, and received from the state in “the gift” corrupts, teaches to wait and demand more handouts. Fall of oil prices – such a layman will immediately start to whine. So the financial situation affects the mind. All in the spirit of Marxist theory.
But this group of reasons, which can be called socio-psychological, not the only one. There is another in which many voters will not admit even to themselves, and many are not aware, but implicitly it defines their “electoral behavior” (and not only electoral) just as much if not more than the first. These reasons can be summarized in one word – fatigue. People are tired of the protracted confrontation that results, primarily for international reasons for the decisive denouement, allowing you to truly solve any problem. Subconsciously builds up a sense of hopelessness. Suppose, again, we’ll choose chavistas – the opposition never recognized the election results, no matter how perfectly honest they are, and the entire “civilized world” will be on her side – and those and others are not left in doubt. So, again, “guarimba”, again killed and wounded, again the tightening of sanctions, again, the threat of war on the borders of the (now two with Colombia and Guyana), again explosions of power transmission lines and not only them, again the sabotage of supply and the entire economy (just try to decide on nationalization – “the civilized world” will go with you as with Libya and Syria).
And all this – with the loss of allies (the right’s already in power in Argentina, on the approaches to it in Brazil), the fall in oil prices. How long? To bloody coup, as in Chile (and Venezuela are almost totally unarmed – there will be shed a sea of blood)? Or to a middle East script, which every day remind the terrorist attacks around the world? Isn’t it better to vote for right – to take power by peaceful constitutional means, and not on the Smoking ruins…
This has already happened more than once. In Nicaragua in 1990. In the Soviet Union and then Russia in the early 90’s, in Ukraine in 2004-m and 2014-m. Only over the past month – in the working-class suburbs of Buenos Aires and bogotá, Guatemala in poor and wealthy France, Turkey and Myanmar.
Can we call this a mood of narrow-minded, blame the electorate for cowardice, to warn: “will regret it” – and that is true. You can even accuse people, received a lot from the revolution, of ingratitude and desertion. But Lenin was not in vain has warned: “Hope in devotion, and such a superb human feelings in politics thing is not serious. Whatever feelings there are a small number of people, and in politics decide the outcome of giant masses, and they are, if a small number of people not suited to them, sometimes cost with this small number of not too polite”.
The masses – even the current, fairly infantilization “society of consumption”, – the “practical life”, as he wrote the same Lenin. And what works for them today and tomorrow, the lesser evil (not in General, but in these particular circumstances) – if they don’t understand, feel better “a small number of people”. Especially when it’s a small number, instead of a sober understanding of the real situation, intoxicating themselves and others of the revolutionary phrase. Heroes such a phrase in Venezuela, and not only there, more than enough. A few of those myself and in the power (navyazli in the teeth of the discourse on radicalization and the offensive, when long overdue to talk about the compromises and the retreat). But even more so in the left opposition (there are such). The latter conceded defeat long before it became a fact, and actually led the campaign for and against Maduro and the PSUV. Now completely rises the howl: of all the resignation, give the coalition government (but who from the opposition will now on this subject to talk with a qualified-majority!)… Like our homegrown opponents of the Brest peace were ready to go “for the temporary loss of Soviet power”. A truly “strange and monstrous” – Lenin better not say anything.
First of all, the current composition of the Parliament has a month of work. He can pass a law expanding the powers of the President, what cavity is likely to go. But his opposition after January 5, will have the opportunity to cancel. But in any case, the President has extra time he has to use.
There is another chance to focus on people’s power. Yes, in Venezuela are being created communes (about 14 thousand), but their powers are limited. It seems that the authorities will attempt to expand legislative power at the local level that can compensate for the loss in the Central legislature.
I hope that in the coming months, the opposition will manifest itself in all its glory. Fortunately she doesn’t have a clear and thought-out political program. Its main aim was to overthrow the non-existent “dictatorship”. Now if it will open fully, then Venezuelans will know for whom they voted.
On the wave of enthusiasm the opposition can go to a referendum to recall the President, which she could initiate from April 2016. It would seem that the balance of power for bad. In these elections for candidates, the authorities voted only 43 percent of voters. But it’s one thing parliamentary elections and another referendum on the resignation of Maduro. Always Venezuelans mobilized on such an important election, the presidential election example. If the opposition has time to discredit itself, in the planned referendum, we can expect the victory of chavismo. Of course, then the political process will not return to normal, at least until the next parliamentary elections, but at least will set the political balance in Latin America happened more than once.
There are, of course, and considerable risk. The opposition can keep the support of the majority, pleading from any argument one: we have no power, you’ll get it then and see what we can do. And most importantly, it can (and probably will) continue to blackmail the nation constitutional conflict “branches of power”, the threat of civil war and intervention.
In any case, Venezuela is entering a very dangerous and interesting period of its history. Let’s wait for news and to follow them.
The text is written in co-authorship with A. Legados.