Re: Chavez and Fighting Back History

["Jose G. Perez" <jg_perez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>Nestor and Jose: I wasn't comparing the FARC to Chavez unfavorably,
just
the opposite. I think following the leadership of Chavez is probably
the
best option Venezuelan workers have right now, and Marxists in that
country
should rally to him, not join one of the myriad of 4th Internationals
or
look for another Lenin. <<

I misunderstood your meaning. Sorry.

On to your real theses: I think your analogies are good ones "but" ...
to be a Nasser, Qaddafi or whoever in today's unipolar world is quite
a different proposition.

As to the stupidity of the U.S. imperialism, look at the push by the
U.S. to launch biological warfare against Coca in Colombia. . . .

I do not know if I would urge people to "follow" Chávez, but rather
"support" him in initiatives against imperialism, the oligarchy and
the their political parties and system. The workers movement needs to
be Chávez's *ally,* at this stage, while maintaining its own identity.

How far Chávez will go, or rather Venezuela in this new stage that's
been opened by Chávez's victory, is impossible to foretell. The Cuban
revolution emerged at a time when American imperialism was incredibly
strong and Latin America extremely weak. The U.S. today may be the
"only" superpower but it is forced to fight with one hand tied behind
its back: the imperialists cannot use ground troops to invade a
country like Venezuela or Colombia without running the risk of setting
off a social explosion at home. Also, there are growing contradictions
and rivalries within the world imperialist system, and there is a
greater relative autonomy vis-a-vis imperialism throughout Latin
America and the third world.

It's not like having the USSR, but then again, look at how the USSR
left the Nicaraguan revolution twisting in the wind until Reagan was
able to bleed it to death. Even the most primitive jet fighters out of
a museum and corresponding radars would have dealt the contras a
terrible blow, and might have prevented the broadening of the war to
encompass much of the national territory. This, and an adequate supply
of helicopters to provide the FSLN needed mobility in a country which
inherited from the past a very poor infrastructure of roads would
almost certainly have led to the contra's defeat.

José

----- Original Message -----
From: "Julio Pino" <jpino@xxxxxxxx>
To: <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 3:31 PM
Subject: Chavez and Fighting Back History


Nestor and Jose: I wasn't comparing the FARC to Chavez unfavorably,
just
the opposite. I think following the leadership of Chavez is probably
the
best option Vebezuelan workers have right now, and Marxists in that
country
should rally to him, not join one of the myriad of 4th Internationals
or
lok for another Lenin. My point, and this goes for the FARC too, is
that
Chavez, from all I have been able to learn about him thus far (and
that
would include info. from relatives in Caracas)shows no sign of going
beyond
Gaitán, Albizu, Bosch, Chávez, Torrijos.The masses may well pressure
him to
do so, or imperialism could commit some incredible blunder, but today
he
seems in a fix, lacking neither the will or political courage but the
resources and diplomatic clout that would permit him to turn sharply
leftward.
   A while back someone aptly labeled Chavez "a Muammar Qaddafi at a
time
of low oil prices." (I understand the two Colonels have exchanged a
warm
corresponence.)"Creole Nasser" migh be another concise sobriquet. But
even
if Venezuela's oil wealth had not been mismanaged, ie, stolen, by
Carlos
Andres Perez, Caldera and the rest of the bunch, Chavez would have
little
manouvering room in a unipolar world, unlike Fidel who could gain the
backing of the USSR, or even Qadaffi who flirted with the Soviets,
British
and even the Italians at the same time.For these reasons, I don't
believe
Chavez can "turn to socialism" even if he wanted to, which is not all
a
clear desire on his part.
Julio Cesar


>In fact, Fidel as well as Gaitán, Albizu, Bosch, Chávez, Torrijos or
>Tirofijo belong to the same matrix of national-revolutionary forces
>in the Caribbean basin, the heirs of the peasants who fought
>Bolívar's wars. They do not spurt out from socialism, but once the
>ruling classes and imperialism are stupid enough (or perverted
>enough) to declare extreme class war against its opponents, they turn
>to socialism.
>
>