For a solution based on working class independence!
By André Ferrari, Liberdade, Socialismo e Revolução (ISA in Brazil)
The 28 July presidential election in Venezuela was a decisive turning point in the deepening political, economic and social crisis in the country. Beyond the dispute over whether or not to recognise the announced electoral result, the underlying issue is that neither option offers any possibility of a way out of the problems affecting the Venezuelan people. On the one hand, there is the continuation of Nicolás Maduro and his pro-capitalist policies, and on the other the victory of the right-wing, reactionary and coup-plotting opposition. The only possible way out is to build an independent working-class alternative armed with a socialist programme.
Nicolás Maduro was announced the winner of the Venezuelan elections by the National Electoral Council (CNE) a few hours after the end of voting. This was challenged by the right-wing opposition, which claimed to have won the election with more than two-thirds of the votes, publishing supposed tallies from polling stations that allegedly prove this.
The crisis spilled out onto the streets, with demonstrations in Caracas and various parts of the country, including working class neighbourhoods that have traditionally been the social base of ‘Chavismo’ (the movement that brought the left-wing reformist government of Hugo Chávez to power. In 2013, Chávez passed away and was succeeded by Maduro). There is no doubt that the right wing sought to manipulate these demonstrations of anger, but it cannot be said that these first spontaneous demonstrations were organised and directed by the right. They reflected an unquestionable accumulation of popular dissatisfaction with the Maduro government.
Repression
The government’s response was a repressive escalation which, according to the authorities themselves, led to the arrest of 2,400 people and 25 deaths.
Using the economic sanctions imposed by US imperialism and the coup attempts of the past as justifications, Maduro’s government has been applying harsh austerity policies of spending cuts, privatisations and attacks on social and workers’ rights and democratic freedoms for years.
The greatest demonstration of Maduro’s anti-democratic policy is that any independent manifestation of the struggle of the working class and the left that refuses to simply say ‘amen’ to the government has come under deliberate and planned attack. For example, the independent left, in its different shades, was attacked and prevented from presenting a left opposition candidacy and platform in these presidential elections.
The massive undermining of Maduro’s support, even among the historic social base of ‘chavismo’, and his profound political degeneration is what has opened up space for a rebuilding of the nefarious Venezuelan right. Building a left-wing alternative to Maduro is necessary for an effective fight against these reactionaries.
Inter-imperialist dispute on Venezuelan territory
When proclaiming themselves victorious in the election, right-wing opposition figures González and Corina Machado were backed by the US government, the European Union and right-wing governments in Latin America. These same countries and authorities staged the farce between 2019 and 2022. in which the former president of the Venezuelan National Assembly, Juan Guaidó, proclaimed himself president of the country.
During this period, sanctions and economic reprisals against Venezuela deepened and new coup attempts followed, but without success. The failure of this offensive, the worsening of the Venezuelan refugee crisis (with more than 5.4 million leaving the country) and the new scenario of an energy crisis resulting from the war in Ukraine, led US imperialism to soften its stance. But that didn’t last long. Although the US continues to allow special licences for oil, the sanctions returned and hit the Venezuelan people. On the other side, the recognition of Maduro’s victory was backed by governments aligned with China and Russia, such as Iran, Cuba, Nicaragua, Honduras and North Korea.
As with US and ‘Western’ imperialism in general, China and Russia want to protect their investments in the country and guarantee access to oil and minerals. Their economic and geopolitical interests have nothing to do with the needs of the Venezuelan working class.
Venezuela’s economic, political and military dependence on China and Russia has deepened with the economic sanctions imposed by the ‘West’ on both Venezuela and Russia. China is Venezuela’s main creditor and its biggest oil buyer, while Russia has provided Maduro with decisive financial and military support.
Faced with the impasse between Maduro and the opposition, the governments of Brazil, Colombia and Mexico joined forces to seek a negotiated solution to the crisis. This move, however, failed.
Brazilian President Lula’s position faced harsh public criticism from Maduro, and the Brazilian and Venezuelan governments, for the first time in a more pronounced way, were on a collision course. Gabriel Boric of Chile, generally identified as part of the ‘progressive’ camp in Latin America, went even further and aligned himself completely with the right-wing opposition against Maduro.
For an independent socialist alternative
The example of the Venezuelan crisis is used by the right as a straw man against those who insist on defending a left-wing solution in Latin America and internationally. The lack of coherent responses from the left to the Venezuelan crisis leads to all kinds of confusion.
On the one hand, there are those who try to differentiate themselves from Maduro by making abstract democratic appeals, within the limits of formal bourgeois democracy. In general, they do this so as not to give themselves problems among a part of ‘public opinion’ that is hostage to the dominant ‘Western’ imperialist narrative. On the other hand, there are those who pragmatically adopt the logic that ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ and earnestly back the Maduro camp, doing all sorts of contortions to justify the actions of this repressive, corrupt and pro-capitalist government.
For the socialist left, there can be no effective response to the Venezuelan crisis without building an independent alternative for the working class. An alternative that draws on the accumulated experience of struggles and victories, but also the lessons of the mistakes and defeats of recent decades, and rebuilds a consistent socialist movement in the country.
The Venezuelan crisis is not the failure of ‘socialism’, but a consequence of the absence of a consistent socialist project on the part of the leadership of the ‘Chavista’ movement since the time of Hugo Chávez. As happened in Nicaragua, this is a complete degeneration of what was once a revolutionary process that could have been victorious and defeated the capitalists inside and outside the country, and indicated a new path for Latin America and the world as a whole.
