|
Venezuela
and Chile
The
Revolution Will Not Be Televised. Video by Kim
Bartley and Donnacha O’Briain.
74 minutes. Available from Power Pictures - Screen Scene, 41 Upper
Mount St, Dublin 2. http://www.chavezthefilm.com
In
1992 Hugo Chavez, a junior parachute officer, tried to seize power in
Venezuela in a traditional South American coup. He failed and spent
some time in jail. He then tried another way and in 1998 was elected
President, with 56 percent of the votes cast; he was re-elected in
2000 with a 60 percent vote. In elections held to a constituent
assembly in 1999 his supporters obtained 120 of the 131 seats.
Chavez
is a populist nationalist and radical reformist not a socialist, but
his programme of radical reforms and moving from private capitalism
towards state capitalism threatened the vested interests of powerful
private capitalist groups. According to anarchist and
anti-parliamentarist theory, which says that even if power can be won
via the ballot box for radical change it can’t
be retained, what should have happened next was that the powerful
groups whose interests were threatened should stage a coup and
unleash a bloody repression. As, for instance, in Chile in September
1973:
“Socialism
cannot come through the Parliament. If we look at a country like
Chile we can see why. In 1973 the people elected a moderate socialist
government led by President Allende. This democratically-elected
government was toppled by a CIA backed military coup. Repression
followed in which the workers movement was smashed and thousands of
militants lost their lives” (“What
is Anarchism?”,
www.struggle.ws/pdfs/whatis.pdf)
(This
statement is both factually wrong and logically flawed. Allende
became president in 1970 and so was not immediately overthrown as is
suggested. And if he was a “moderate
socialist”, i.e. a mere reformist like
the Labour and Social Democratic parties of Europe and Australasia,
there have been plenty of other such governments, which have not been
toppled in a coup; in fact, most haven’t.
Having said this, socialism cannot come through electing such
governments but for quite other reasons than that they come to power
through elections.)
On
11 April 2002, true to anarchist theory, a group of top Venezuelan
army officers and business leaders did stage a coup. Chavez was
arrested and taken to a secret destination where he was put under
pressure to resign (he refused). It so happened that an Irish film
crew, which had come to make a documentary about Chavez and
Venezuela, was actually in the presidential palace at the time. The
Revolution Will Not Be Televised is a fascinating and instructive
record of how events unfolded over the next few days (together with
material from the originally-planned film and lots of Spanish with
sub-titles): the dejected ministers, the installation of the usurper
president, the recapture of the palace by the presidential guard, the
arrest of some of the plotters, the pro-Chavez street demonstrations
and the return of Chavez two days later. He is still there.
So
the coup failed. It failed because those who had voted for Chavez
were prepared to take to the streets to back up their vote and
because the bulk of the armed forces remained loyal to the
constitution and the constitutionally-elected president. The
anarchist theory that power obtained by the ballot box to effect
radical changes can’t be retained was
disproved by experience.
What
happened confirms rather our view that a socialist majority can both
win and retain power via the ballot box if that majority is
sufficiently organised and determined and if there is no question as
to their democratic legitimacy. If pro-capitalist elements were to
stage a coup after a socialist election victory it could prove to be
even more short-lived than in Venezuela in April 2002. The slogan
that anarchists and other chant on demonstrations that “the
people united can never be defeated” is
actually true, to back up an electoral victory too.
The
film is being shown at the Anarchist Bookfair in London this month.
It will be interesting to see how they will explain away the events
it records. Perhaps they’ll change the
text of their leaflet to:
“Socialism
may be able to come through the Parliament. If we look at a country
like Venezuela we cannot see why not. In 1998 and 2000 the people
elected a radical reformist government led by President Chavez. An
attempt was made in 2002 to topple this democratically elected
government but it failed because the government enjoyed majority
popular support and the loyalty of the armed forces“.
ALB

|
Socialist Party
Autumn
Delegates
Meeting
2006
Saturday 14 October
10.30 to 5.30pm.
Sunday 15 October
11.00 to 5.00pm
Venue: Head Office, 52 Clapham High Street,
London SW4.
|
|
|
|
Manchester Branch
Monday
23 October,
8.15 pm
‘CAPITALISM,
PUBS AND BEER’
Hare and
Hounds,
Shudehill, City Centre
|
|
|
Note of correction
The article "September 11, 2001:
Reflections on a Somewhat Unusual Act of
War" (September Socialist Standard) refers
to arguments that it states were made by
anti-war analyst Rahul Mahajan in his book
The New Crusade: America's War on
Terrorism (New York: Monthly Review
Press, 2002). In fact, these arguments
were drawn from another book by the same
author: Full Spectrum Dominance: U.S.
Power in Iraq and Beyond (New York:
Seven Stories Press, 2003
In the August issue we stated that
"China is using 47 per cent of the world's
cement to complete the damming of the
Yangzi" (p. 8). In the September issue we
wrote that China was using "almost 70
percent of the world's cement supplies on a
single dam project" (p. 9). Both figures
can't be right. In fact, both are wrong.
China is generally calculated as using 47
per cent of the world's cement (see, for
example,
http://southasia.oneworld.net/article/view/12
5468/1/1893) but not all of this is for the
Yangzi dam project.
|
|
|
SOCIALIST STANDARD INDEX
An index to articles in 2005 can be
obtained by sending 2 postage stamps to:
Socialist Standard, 52 Clapham High
Street, London SW4 7UN
|
|
|
|