Tijuana Conference To Take Up Hemisphere's Struggles

By Cheryl LaBash
Published Nov 5, 2011 2:41 PM

Where is the electrifying Occupy Wall Street movement headed?

From capitalist media pundits to the Occupy Wall Street encampments struggling to hold public space in countless cities and towns across the U.S., this question is bubbling underneath the daily actions and police repression.

An opportunity to discuss the experience of other such movements will take place just across the U.S. border from San Diego in Tijuana, Mexico, on Dec. 2 to 4 at the 8th U.S./Cuba/Mexico/Latin America Labor Conference. It will follow a three-day Workers’ School with instructors from the Lázaro Peña Cadre School in Havana, Cuba. Online registration and information are available at http://LaborExchange.blogspot.com.

Occupations, general strikes and militant marches are being renewed in the U.S. today. On May 1, 2006, the massive immigrant rights marches were effectively general strikes in many areas. This national movement had a strong impact. Earlier this year, tens of thousands mobilized daily to support an occupation of Wisconsin’s Capitol in Madison to challenge an anti-worker program. Through all this, the working class is learning to take action in its own name.

In Central and South America and the Caribbean, workers, Indigenous people and rural farmers have walked this path before us. They have been on the receiving end of imperialist economic domination, coup d’états, military dictatorships and rigged elections sponsored by the United States. Today the Mexican electrical workers are occupying the central square in Mexico City, which they have held since March. Chilean and Colombian students are fighting for education rights. Moreover, tiny Cuba has held off the imperialist giant to the north poised to destroy them for more than 50 years with a battle of ideas and profound unity.

The Oakland call for a citywide general strike and march to the port on Nov. 2 to “block the flow of capital” states the truth: “The Oakland General Strike will demonstrate the wide reaching implications of the Occupy Wall Street movement. The entire world is fed up with the huge disparity of wealth caused by the present system. Now is the time that the people are doing something about it. The Oakland General Strike is a warning shot to the 1 percent: Their wealth only exists because the 99 percent creates it for them.”

That is true. For those who want to discuss where this truth can take us with active builders of independent social orders, send a representative to the December conference in Tijuana. We have a world to win!

Vietnamese Communist Party Sends Delegation to Venezuela

From: Vietnam News

HA NOI – A delegation of the Communist Party of Viet Nam recently attended the 14th congress of the Communist Party of Venezuela (PCV).

The delegation, led by Party Central Committee Commission for External Relations deputy head Vuong Thua Phong, held meetings with General Secretary Oscar Figuera and other members of the PCV Political Bureau, to increase the solidarity and traditional co-operation between the Parties and peoples of the two countries.

The delegation also had discussions with other international delegations.

Themed "Together with the working class and labourers to seize power", the 14 th Party Congress from August 4-7 discussed a political report, updated the platform and renewed the Party Statutes.

The congress affirmed consistent support for the social security policies of the administration of President Hugo Chavez. — VNS

Peru: Today & Yesterday

Yesterday, Humala, a social-democratic anti-imperialist defeated the Kieko Fujimori, daughter of the former fascist dictator in the presidential election.

The history of the country is important.

Below is a documentary made during the height of Peru's Maoist insurrection, showing the conditions of Peru that led to support for "El Sendero Luminoso"(The Shining Path).

In 1989-1991, the U.S. imperialists were reveling in victories against the former Soviet Union. Neo-Liberalism was on the march. However, in Peru, this sparked support for Mao Zedong Thought.

In the same period, the "Caracazo", an armed revolutionary uprising in Venezuela, sparked the beginnings of the Bolivarian movement which culminated in Hugo Chavez taking power.

What will the victory of Humala bring? We shall see.

One wonders what impact, if any, the Maoist revolt document below, has had these years later, on the election of an anti-imperialist President?

Thousands Protest Sanctions on Venezuela

By Rachael Boothroyd - Venezuelanalysis.com

Coro, May 25th 2011 (Venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan government criticised the Obama administration’s move to impose sanctions on Venezuela’s state oil company Pdvsa, calling the sanctions an “imperialist attack” against Venezuela.

The U.S. State Department enforced the sanctions in an attempt to put further pressure on Iran to halt its nuclear programme by penalising companies which continue to trade with the Islamic Republic.

U.S. Vice Secretary of State James Steinberg, who made the announcement to journalists on Tuesday, said that in approving the sanctions the U.S. wanted to send a “clear message” to companies which continue to “irresponsibly support Iran” – “they will suffer serious consequences,” he said.

Between December 2010 and March 2011 Venezuela, which has friendly bilateral relations with Iran, exported $50 million worth of a fuel additive to Iran. The U.S. government deemed the trade relations to be in breach of the 1996 Iran Sanctions Act.

“The U.S. needs to move quickly to cut off Chávez’s source of revenue, and bring an end to both his influence in Latin America and his dangerous relationship with the terrorist-supporting Iranian regime before it’s too late,” said U.S Congressman and Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, Connie Mack.

The measures will also affect other smaller companies in Jersey, Monaco, the United Arab Emirates, Israel and Singapore.

Although Pdvsa will continue to sell oil on the U.S. market, the sanctions – which will last two years – prevent the company from entering into contracts with the U.S. government, as well as barring it from import-export finance programmes and obtaining licenses for U.S. oil processing technology. None of the company’s subsidiaries will be affected.

Venezuelan Government: “Sovereign Nation”

In a press conference on Tuesday, Venezuelan Minister of Foreign Relations Nicolas Maduro said: “We are not afraid of these sanctions, nor are we going to debate the reasons that the North American government may have, but Venezuela is sovereign in making its decisions.”

An official document rejecting the sanctions was drafted and signed by pro-Chavez Venezuelan ministers, but opposition politicians refused to sign it. “This shows once again that these politicians are representatives of North American imperialism,” said Energy and Oil Minister Rafael Ramirez.

Ramirez also stated: “The imperialist powers are hoping to dictate the rules to us. They will have to go without, because we are going to keep advancing towards creating unity between oil-producing countries.”

Pdvsa Workers Stage Day of Action

In the early hours of this morning Pdvsa workers initiated a day of action in defence of the company, taking part in demonstrations, take-overs of oil refineries, cultural activities and convoking a popular assembly in order to manifest their support for the government’s foreign policy.

Workers have been engaged in activities in Anzoátegui, Carabobo, Monagas and other states throughout the day.

A female worker in Monagas, Chiquín Yánez, said that the workers “will not accept Yankee imperialist interference in the sovereignty of Venezuela. The new Pdvsa is an independent company and the workers of this national company do not obey Yankee imperialism”.

Expressing a similar sentiment, Domingo Franco, who works in Pdvsa, reiterated the workers’ rejection of North American interventionism, stating: “We reject this latest North American interference in Venezuelan matters. The workers are at the ready to defend our oil industry. Our call is to defend the Orinoco [Oil] Belt. The imperial powers want our natural riches and we will defend our resources even with our life”.

Women’s and peasant organisations, alternative media, and community councils also organised a march in Caracas in response to the sanctions. Socialist women’s activist Anais Arismendi said the popular movement condemned “the unilateral decisions taken by a criminal state such as the U.S.A, which don’t respect international conventions,” adding that the U.S. was trying to “organise another right-wing offensive against the processes and countries which are currently liberating their own people”.

Iran Reaction

Although Iranian President Ahmadinejad maintains that the programme is purely for supplying energy to civilians, the U.S. claims that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

Ahmadinejad has previously accused “nuclear nations” of “monopolising” science and technology in order to protect their own interests and also of prohibiting other countries from the “peaceful use of nuclear energy”.

In a speech following the inauguration of an oil production project in the city of Abadan on Tuesday, Ahmadinejad accused the U.S. government of supporting dictators in the region. However, he did not comment on the newly imposed sanctions.

“Anywhere there is a dictator he is supported by you...he is your stooge...” he said in direct reference to Washington.

Sanctions against Iran have formed an integral part of U.S. foreign policy since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, with broader sanctions coming into effect during the Clinton administration in the 1990s and from 2005 under President Bush – who also launched banking sanctions. Prior to 1979 Washington and Europe supported and provided assistance for the development of a nuclear plan under the Shah.

In an official statement the Venezuelan government said it would undertake a “general assessment of the situation to determine how these sanctions affect the operational capacity of our oil industry and, therefore, the supply of 1.2 million barrels of oil per day to the U.S.”

Cindy Sheehan: We Reject United States Sanctions Against Venezuela

By Cindy Sheehan May 29, 2011

On Tuesday, May 24, 2011, the United States Department of State unilaterally imposed sanctions against Venezuela's state-owned oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PDVSA), for its alleged relations with the government of Iran. The sanctions are a desperate and weak attempt to link Venezuela to Iran's nuclear energy program as part of an ongoing campaign to justify further aggressive action against the South American oil producing nation.

As citizens of the United States, we unequivocally reject this latest attempt of our administration to demonize the Venezuelan government and undermine the vibrant democracy of the Venezuelan people. The Venezuelan government of Hugo Chavez has already been victim of a coup d'etat in 2002, backed by Washington, which briefly ousted the President from power. Fortunately for the health of Venezuela's democracy, the people fought back, rescued their President, and reinstated constitutional order. Then, as now, the United States stood alone in its support for hostilities against Venezuela's democratically-elected government.

The government of Hugo Chavez has used its oil wealth to invest heavily in improving the wellbeing of its people. Currently, more than 60% of oil industry profits are directed towards social programs in Venezuela, including free healthcare, education, job training, community media, grassroots organizations and subsidized food and housing. The results are notable. Poverty in Venezuela has been reduced by over 50% during the Chavez administration, illiteracy has been eradicated and free, universal healthcare and education are available and accesible to all. These policies of social justice have extended well beyond the borders of Venezuela to the United States though programs that supply free, discounted or subsidized heating oil and fuel to low income neighborhoods, indigenous peoples' communities and homeless shelters throughout the nation.

More than 250,000 US citizens in 25 states and the District of Columbia have benefited to date from the Venezuelan government's subsidized heating oil program, which is run through PDVSA's subsidiary in the United States, CITGO. No other oil company in the world - including US companies - has offered to help low income families suffering from the inflated cost of heating oil during the past six years, except for CITGO. Venezuela's solidarity with the people of the United States has enabled thousands of families to survive through these difficult economic times.

We find it outrageous that the United States government would attempt to demonize the one company, and country, that has been there for our neighbors, putting people before profits. And we call on our representatives in Washington to suspend these sanctions against Venezuela immediately.

Chavez, A Friend to the U.S. Poor

Chavez Highlights Revolutionary Sucesses

From: Venezuela Analysis
February 3rd 2011 (Venezuelanalysis.com) – On Wednesday Venezuela marked the 12th anniversary of President Hugo Chávez’s February 1999 first oath of office. To commemorate, Chávez and supporters held four televised site visits in the nation’s capital, highlighting gains in education, food, health and people’s power that he attributed to the “Bolivarian Revolution.”

Chávez began the day visiting a public elementary school in downtown Caracas’s Parque Central with newly appointed Minister of Education, Maryann Hanson Flores. The two spoke with teachers, staff and students about Venezuela’s housing emergency before presenting Canaima laptop computers to the entire 2nd grade student body.

“There is a lot to celebrate today, but there is still so much to do,” Chávez told the schoolchildren. “Today I want us to renew our hope in a country that gets better each day…to renovate our capacity to struggle so that we continue advancing,” he said.

Venezuela’s three-year old Canaima Program, which distributes mass-produced laptop computers to elementary school children, reached over 437,000 students in 2010 alone, according to AVN.

Chávez’s second stop was at the local headquarters of the Venezuelan Producer and Distributor of Foods (PDVAL) in Cotiza, northern Caracas, where he announced the authorization of 478 million bolivars ($US 111 million) to open 1,000 prepared food stores including additional ‘areperas’, and bread and meat shops.

PDVAL is part of Venezuela’s Food Mission, which works to secure food needs at subsidized and regulated prices for all Venezuelans through the supermarket and grocery store network made up by Mercados de Alimentos (Mercal), Bicentenary markets, and PDVAL.

“You’re going to see how much we will reduce the price of everything,” said Chávez in reference to the overall effect on food prices resulting from government-owned prepared food outlets such as the Arrepera Socialista.

Alfredo Massiar, resident coordinator of the United Nation’s Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) in Venezuela, recently spoke to the advances made in Venezuelan food under the Chávez administration.

“On behalf of the Director-General of the FAO, Jacques Diof, we want to congratulate the Bolivarian Government and your President Hugo Chávez on the work you have been carrying out, as well as your efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, especially as they relate to food security and sovereignty, a goal for reducing poverty,” Massiar said.

While at PDVAL, Chávez spoke of his electoral history and plans for re-election in presidential elections scheduled for December 2012.

“They [the opposition] made us lose about three years between the coup, countercoup and oil lockout, and we’ve had to make up for lost time,” Chávez said.

“Here we have had four presidential elections. And the day they overthrew me [11 April 2002] we won again because the people returned me to power, that’s a fifth. And in 2012 we are again going to win,” he said.

“The government must govern by obeying and, whenever you decide to, you can get rid of me,” said Chávez.

In the early afternoon, Chávez visited the ‘Ibis Pino’ Integral Diagnostic Center (CDI) located in the impoverished 23 de Enero neighborhood of Caracas. The CDI is one of 533 such centers that form part of Misión Barrio Adentro’s nationwide health access program staffed by thousands of Cuban medical professionals attending low-income Venezuelans.

According to Chávez, over 55 million free medical consultations have been provided to Venezuelans nationwide as part Misión Barrio Adentro.

Magdalena Santiesteban, Cuban doctor and coordinator of the CDI, said that staff there have attended to 6,400 emergency room cases since first opening their doors in September of last year. Of these cases, 74 people needed and received intensive care and another 79 patients were hospitalized, though with less severe health risks.

“After 12 years, today we can at last say we have a national public health care system,” Chávez said. “This is only possible in Revolution. This is only possible with this Bolivarian Government. That is why we have a bourgeoisie crazy to remove Chávez,” he said.

In the evening, Chávez presided over a ceremony at the Miraflores Presidential Palace. “We have gathered here to pay homage to people’s power, the greatest gain of this revolution,” he said.

“Everything has to do with potential and with power. The potential of the people has been converted into power,” he said.

According to José Vicente Rangel, Chávez’s vice president during his first five years in office, the changes in Venezuela’s political culture and popular participation are “irreversible.”

“I have always considered the greatest achievement of this process to be the making the people visible,” said Rangel. “The people came out of the dark and today find themselves in the middle of the street, and they will not return to the dens where they used to live. This achievement is irreversible,” he said.

Currently, Venezuelans throughout the country have established over 30,000 communal councils and are expected to consolidate these popular institutions into 236 communes, according to the Venezuelan News Agency (AVN).

Chávez elaborated, “This didn’t exist before in Venezuela,” he said. “Now we have the campesino [rural worker] movements, the communes, the student movements, the communal banks, the women, the athletes, and the indigenous,” he said.

“Chávez, in reality, isn’t Chávez. Chávez, as such, is a collective. Without the collective I would be worth absolutely nothing – from a political point of view – and the counterrevolutionaries would defeat us, and we won’t allow that to happen,” affirmed Chávez.

New Venezuelan Law Abolishes Homelessness

By Juan Reardon -

From: Venezuela Analysis

Mérida, January 20th 2011 (Venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez issued a law-decree on Tuesday to address “rights and justice” of the roughly 125,000 Venezuelans made homeless during last year’s record-setting rains and floods. The ‘Law for Dignified Refuge,’ according to Chávez, serves to, “institutionalize the figure of a dignified and humane refuge, and begins by establishing responsibilities of the government, the people, and the different sectors of national life.”

The enactment of the law is also consistent with a pledge made by Chávez last week to speed up his use and return legislative authority granted to him by Venezuela’s national assembly late last year in response to the rains.

Chávez made the announcement during a ceremony at Miraflores Presidential Palace in which he presented dozens of families from the improvised “Club Unión Mirador” shelter – in Caracas’s low-income 23 de Enero neighborhood – with a newly designed ‘petro-refuge’ that meets the “dignified living” criteria laid out in the new law.

As of Thursday, 25 “dignified refuges” including ‘petro-refuges’ (see image) have been handed over to residents, with a total of 60 expected to be up and running in the coming days.

According to Chávez, legally transforming shelters into “institutions of the state” helps to overcome the tendency of creating “spaces to see how people will survive in total abandonment” as has often been the case with housing shelters in Venezuela.

“This is an old story,” said Chávez. “Caracas super populated and the poor living in their shacks on the hillsides…The national government must take on, with greater depth, the cancellation of this social debt,” he affirmed in reference to historically precarious living conditions in poor neighborhoods throughout Venezuela.

While Article 1 designates the “shared responsibility” of the government and people to organize the well-being of all those affected by natural disasters, Article 2 stipulates that, “refuges are to serve as a dignified space for living and community coexistence.”

Article 8 classifies all shelters into categories A – E, based on the number of residents per shelter and the conditions available for each family. In addition, the law stipulates that economic support is to be provided resident families – such as scholarships, pensions and special allotments of resources – depending on the situation faced by each family unit.

“It’s no longer a question of having certain norms. This will be obligatory,” said Chávez.

According to Isis Ochoa, Venezuela’s Minister of the Communes and Social Protection, the new law seeks to, “convert temporary shelters into state institutions, into spaces in which the basic human rights of the people are guaranteed.” In addition, the law “promotes popular participation and shared responsibility in the management and maintenance of the shelters,” she said.

Article 17 of the law stipulates that “Popular Housing Committees are to connect and create organized networks” of shelter residents. Article 18 stipulates that every 20 families are to elect their own representatives to said Committees. These Committees then become only entities with the legal authority to call meetings, form commissions and organize the internal day-to-day operations of these shelters.

Speaking to Venezolana de Televisión (VTV) on Wednesday, Ochoa described the “25,000 families that must begin to organize themselves into communities” as they prepare to live together throughout 2011, until government-secured housing is made available at the end of the year. These families, she said, are amongst the most at-risk sectors of Venezuelan society.

“In these centers we have focalized what is called the most vulnerable population. There are children, adolescents, seniors, people with disabilities, and pregnant women, all of whom – thanks to the dynamics of the capitalist model – found themselves in situations of great risk,” said Ochoa.

According to Ochoa, “this law is born of need to construct a political and legal architecture that assures a society based on justice and rights.”

Chávez described the new law as a legal obligation not only for his, but for future governments.

“It’s not a question of a government wanting to do this or not,” he affirmed. “It is now a legal obligation and is outlined explicitly in the smallest of details.”

Referring to criticisms from the opposition about his authority to pass laws by decree for the next 18 months, Chávez said that he does not, “understand how some spokespersons of the Venezuelan right can oppose the Enabling Law.” “Let me work, I am working for the people,” he said.

“[These] Enabling Laws are a necessity to guarantee people’s basic human rights and to attend to the people’s needs,” said Chávez.

As reported by Venezuelanalysis earlier this week, Chávez spoke to opposition critiques of the Enabling Law during his January 15 address to Venezuela’s national assembly:

“[The opposition] goes around saying [the government] is a dictatorship, in five months we can create the laws to deal with all the emergencies, we have almost 120,000 people still in refuges…We could be finished by 1 May, so that nobody feels limited, I could withdraw the enabling law, I’m going to work harder and quicker,” he said.

The outgoing National Assembly had given Chavez an enabling law that allows him to pass laws by decree for 18 months, a decision that provoked strong criticism from numerous opposition voices in Venezuela and abroad.

Sara Flounders on PressTV discussing Venezuela, Columbia

Loony Moony Paper Lies A Lot - Chavez & Obama, not Twins or Dictators

A Response To: "Chavez Copies The Pelosi-Reid Playbook

The self-proclaimed rein-carnation of Jesus Christ, Rev. Sun Myung Moon's personal propaganda newspaper "The Washington Times" has published an editorial claiming that Barack Obama is using the "lame duck congress" to assume "dictatorial power" and that Venezuela's Hugo Chavez is doing the same thing.

The paper is wrong on both counts!

If the paper were not the primary right-wing newspaper in Washington D.C. it would not be worth a response. If the fact that the paper is run by a minister who believes he is the reincarnation of Jesus Christ is not enough to discredit it entirely, here is more.

1. The Reason For Electoral Losses

The reason Chavez's party is losing the almost absolute power it has in the National Assembly, is because the Anti-Chavez parties boycotted the previous elections claiming they were fraudulent. As the saying goes, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take, not just in basketball, but in all fields of life.

Pro-Chavez parties will still have 59% of the parliament, in an election approved by the United Nation, the Carter Center, and the Organization of American States.

2. New Law Will Give Chavez "Absolute Power"

No. Blatant Falsehood.

The new laws will enable Chavez to make decrees with regards to emergencies.

His decrees cannot surpass the constitution (which includes freedom of the press, etc.), and can be revoked by popular referendum, if only 5% of the population wants one.

Even this expires in 18 months.

The law was passed to enable Chavez to rapidly move people suffering from flooding without requiring the approval of the National Assembly. The decrees can only be applied to areas related to the economy, environmental sustainability, and public safety.

He cannot decree people to be jailed, declarations of war, or anything else.

Overwhelmingly, numerous times, the people of Venezuela have voted by over 60% majorities to transform the country into a socialist republic.

The law will enable Chavez to support the massive worker's movements in the country that are seizing factories, establishing communes, and replacing the army with popular militias left and right.

5 out of the 6 major televisions stations in the country are owned by private companies hostile to Hugo Chavez. Only one of them has lost its license due to calls for his assassination, and it remains available to all on the internet.

3. This is comparable to Hitler's "Reichstag Fire" and the Italian Fascists "March on Rome."

Hitler's "Reichstag fire" was a totally different political occurrence.

Hitler falsely claimed that the Reichstag Fire was carried out on order from the Communist International. As a result, all elected members of the Communist Party were arrested, giving their seats to the to the Second Place winners, in many places the Nazis.

Hitler did not have a majority in the German Parliament until the jailing of the Communists. Despite massive electoral fraud, Hitler never had even a plurality in Parliament. He was appointed Chancellor, and never had any electoral strength until the jailing of the Communist who won seats.

Chavez, on the other hand, has had a clear electoral majority since 1999, without any electoral fraud. In addition, the decree law does not enable him to suppress the civil liberties of the opposition parties. How is there any comparison?

And Benito Mussolini's "March on Rome" in 1922 was a strong-armed seizure of power. The "decree laws" were not passed until a gang of thugs, "Black Shirts" called the Fascisti, armed by wealthy italian capitalists burst into Rome, dissolved the government and set up an un-elected group of themselves.

Chavez has not dissolved the National Assembly. He has not had any members of the government opposition parties arrested. He has not dissolved the parliament at the barrel of a gun.

How is there any comparison?

Chavez has been granted similiar powers twice before in the country's history, in 1999 and 2007. Each time the law has expired, no mass arrests of the opposition have taken place, and the Venezuelan right-wing continues to be free to lie, disrupt, and do its best to preserve capitalism.

4. Obama is somehow doing the same thing

Obama has failed to enact even the extremely moderate program on which he was elected. No public option exists in healthcare. Healthcare reform has been reduced to corporate handouts, nothing comparable to publicly accountable, free quality healthcare Chavez has enacted.

Despite have 60 votes in the U.S. Senate, the Democratic Party has allowed the Republicans to filibuster everything. Obama screams of "bipartisanship."

Rahm Emmanuel, a key figure in the Obama administration said that people who think his healthcare bill didn't go far enough are "f---ing retards."

Unlike Chavez, who has embraced the Socialist and Communist movements, the Obama administration loathes them. Robert Gibbs railed against the "Professional Left" who want to "shut down the pentagon" and establish "Canadian Healthcare."

Obama's program of the capitalist status quo, and Chavez program of popular, democratic socialist transformation, have nothing in common.

Conclusions:

What the people of the world need to understand is this. The Right-Wing will never approve of Social Progress.

No matter how democratically approved your reforms are, and how much popular support they have, they will still proclaim "dictatorship."

In addition, no matter how much "bipartisanship" and mouthing of "cooperation" is given, the right-wing will still insist that you are a "brutal dictator."

Chavez has done a lot, but with massive popular support. He is called a dictator.

Obama has done NOTHING, and betrayed the many people who voted for him in the name of change. The right-wing still insists he is a "brutal dictator."

The only road to change that is possible is the road of class struggle. We cannot negotiate or have civil debate with the capitalists.

We seek justice for all. They seek eternal wage slavery.

CLASS AGAINST CLASS, is the only way forward!

New Block of "Popular Power" Laws in Venezuela

By Tamara Pearson – Venezuelanalysis.com

Mérida, December 10th 2010 (Venezuelanalysis.com) – Late last night Venezuela’s national assembly approved, in second discussion, the new Organic Law of Popular Power, and this afternoon it passed the Organic Law of Popular and Public Planning. The two laws form part of a five law “popular power” that aim to transform the state structures of planning and decision making to involve more grassroots organisations.

A block of laws

The National Assembly began its second round of discussions of the block of laws this week. Together the laws promote decentralisation of power, collective property, self government, and the Government Federal council as the planning organisation.

The Government Federal Council was formally created at the start of this year and consists of ministers, mayors, governors, and communal council and social movement representatives planning the national budget.

However, beyond meeting at a national level, it has been meeting at municipal levels with communal councils to then discuss the allocation of funding and resources to specific projects that are of a collective interest to multiple communal councils, such as public works, schools, and hospitals.

The five laws that make up the block are; the Organic Law of Popular Power, the Organic Law of Popular and Public Planning (both of which were first discussed on 16 December 2009), the Organic Law of Communes, the Organic Law of Social Auditing (both of which were first discussed on 22 June this year) and the Organic Law for the Development and Promotion of the Communal Economy.

First vice president of the National Assembly, Dario Vivas, said the laws will allow for the strengthening of popular power and complement already existing laws such as the Communal Council law and the Government Federal Council law.

Legislator Augusto Montiel said the packet of laws were necessary for creating the conditions to transform the current “bourgeois state”.

“To be able to put an end to the bourgeois state that we still have, we need to create conditions for the development of a community based, communal, democratic, protagonistic and revolutionary state. That is, to create a state that doesn’t allow power to be concentrated in the hands of a few privileged people,” Montiel said.

According to the National Assembly press, the block of laws have received “broad national consultation” with the participation of the minister for communes, communal councils, legislators and the president of Venezuela.

Organic Law of Popular Power

Legislator Ulises Daal said the Popular Power Law, with its 134 articles, is about the direct participation of the communities in public management, and that such a concept was supported by article 5 of the constitution.

Article 7 of the law states that one of the law’s aims is to “promote the strengthening of the organisation of people in accordance with consolidating revolutionary protagonistic democracy... and the creation of communal and community self government forms.”

Socially owned productive organisations should have priority when any public power organisation need goods, services or works carried out, as stated in article 29 of the approved law.

The Popular Power Law defines popular power organisations as when people are organised based on where they live or their daily lives, forming organisations made up of citizens with common interests and objectives in order to overcome difficulties and promote collective well being. Specific self government organisations of popular power are the communal councils, the commune and systems of communal aggregation.

Daal said that as long as the people organise through such forms of self government, “No one will ever be able to take power away from the people”.

Law of Popular and Public Planning

The Law of Popular and Public Planning, approved this afternoon, incorporates communal councils and communes into the national planning system.

“This law is aimed at laying the basis for planning that allows for the administration of resources in an efficient way, to then achieve a fair distribution of the wealth,” said Daal.

The law forms and outlines the organisation and functioning of the National System of Public Planning, a system which aims to optimise the processes of defining, formulating, executing, and evaluating public policies.

Making up the National System of Public Planning are the state, municipal, commune, and communal council public planning councils as well as the communal councils and the Government Federal Council.

The National Assembly report of the law states that it institutionalises “a methodology that is centred on the coordination among entities so that public planning, as a political instrument, orientates the actions of the state”.

The law, according to the report, provides for broad and mass participation in determining objectives of plans, their application, and possible future revision.

Opposition response

Discussion of the Law of Popular Power finished at 11.35pm last night becase, according to the national assembly report, opposition legislators tried to block the approval of all the different chapters and articles.

Daal said the opposition legislators, “fear the transference of power to the organisations of popular power because they know that they will lose a lot of their quotas of power in the state and regional governments.”

The main opposition coalition, the Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD) said the packet of laws “threaten the future of democracy” and the Law of Popular Power is unconstitutional because it “uses terms that aren’t contemplated in the constitution such as social auditing, communal economy, popular power, communal economic system, socialism, and communal self government.”

Legislator Juan Molina, of opposition party Podemos said the laws “were already rejected in the Constitutional Reform” referendum in 2007, and legislator Ricardo Gutierrez, also of Podemos, said the approval of the laws was equivalent to a “Coup d’état”.

Daal responded that articles 70, 118, 169, 173 and 184 of the constitution support the law package as they refer to popular participation, the rights of communities to develop “associative forms” involving any type of legal economic activity, and different types of local organisation, decentralisation, and transference of authority to the communities.

The approved laws now goes to the national executive to enact them and then when they are published in the Official Gazette they will becomes applicable. The current National Assembly, with almost all its members in the governing United Socialist Party of Venezuela due to an opposition boycott in the 2005 elections, will end its term this 5 January.

U.S. Role in Costa Rica-Nicaragua Border Dispute

By Berta Joubert-Ceci
Published Dec 5, 2010 10:22 PM

The latest conflict in Central America is a dispute between Costa Rica and Nicaragua. It has hardly been covered in the U.S. media. Still it could increase U.S. military intervention and have dangerous consequences for the region’s stability.

One simple issue stands out: the two countries’ alliances. Costa Rica’s government is aligned with U.S. imperialism. Nicaragua is a member of the Bolivarian Alliance for Our America or ALBA, which includes Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Dominica, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Antigua and Barbuda. The U.S. State Department considers ALBA hostile to U.S. interests.

Nicaragua’s government is led by President Daniel Ortega, who also led the country during 1979-1990 after the Sandinistas (FSLN) overthrew the pro-U.S. Somoza dictatorship. Ortega faces election in 2011, one Washington would like to see him lose.

Washington has been able to use Costa Rica against its neighbors in the past. The U.S.-backed anti-Sandinista contras in the 1980s used Costa Rica as a safe base. In June 2009 the U.S.-sanctioned coup-makers in Honduras kidnapped President Manuel Zelaya and flew him to Costa Rica. Zelaya had also signed his country into ALBA.

Facts behind the border dispute

On Oct. 18 the Nicaraguan government began dredging the San Juan River, which flows from Lake Nicaragua to the Caribbean through Nicaragua. Part of it forms the Nicaragua-Costa Rica border. Residue accumulated over the years made river transport to and from the Caribbean coast nearly impossible.

Nicaragua has been ravaged first by the 1980-1990 U.S.-Contra war against the Sandinista government and then by the next administration’s neoliberal policies. This history has left 75 percent of Nicaragua’s 6 million people in poverty.

To improve the economy of this extremely poor country, the government began developing transportation to increase exports, particularly to South America and other ALBA countries.

On Oct. 21 the Costa Rican government, led by right-wing President Laura Chinchilla, falsely accused Nicaragua of invading its territory and occupying Costa Rica’s Calero Island. On Oct. 22 Chinchilla sent a military contingent to the Nicaragua border and demanded Nicaragua stop dredging, which she claimed damaged the environment and violated Costa Rica’s sovereignty.

Costa Rica complained to the Organization of American States, the International Court of Justice in The Hague, and the Ramsar Convention, which deals with wetlands around the world, and requested a U.N. meeting on Nov. 29. Similar border disputes go back centuries. The one over the San Juan River, in particular, has always been ruled in Nicaragua’s favor.

An OAS team flew over Calero Island on Nov. 8 and reported that neither the Nicaraguan flag nor its army was there. Nevertheless, the Chinchilla government continues the accusations.

It’s also still fanning the flames of racism and xenophobia against Nicaragua, and the half-million Nicaraguans living and working in wealthier Costa Rica face discrimination. However, Costa Rican groups, unions and political parties are not participating in this and are opposing their government’s actions.

Up to now, the Costa Rican government has refused Ortega’s request to begin bilateral negotiations.

Though the Costa Rican government promotes the country as an “ecological paradise,” there are contradictions. There are plans for open-air exploitation of a gold mine close to the San Juan River that would poison the waters with cyanide and other toxic chemicals. That activity is opposed by both Nicaraguan and Costa Rican environmental organizations working together. The timber industry and cattle raising are abundant in northern Costa Rica, causing environmental damage.

Even though Costa Rica does not have a formal army, according to a report published in “El Libro Blanco” (“The White Book: The Truths That Costa Rica Hides”), $240.3 million per year is spent on the military — five times more than by Nicaragua. (el19digital.com)

The Nicaraguan military does patrol the San Juan River, intercepting any drug traffic that goes through the area. In early October the Nicaraguan army broke up a drug trafficking team in the river, arresting six people and informing Costa Rican authorities, since the team was operating from Costa Rica.

Washington’s role

The major threat not only to Nicaragua but to the whole region is the deployment last July of 46 war ships, along with 7,000 U.S. troops, to Costa Rica on the pretext of fighting drug trafficking. Costa Rica has been on the U.S. president’s list of countries with the most illicit drug trafficking.

This has turned Costa Rica into a U.S. military base. U.S. troops can move, armed to the teeth, throughout the whole country and enjoy the characteristic impunity to any of their crimes that accompanies these imperialist enforcers throughout the world. Their contract to patrol ends at the end of 2010, but there are many places the U.S. military, once in, has refused to leave.

This move into Costa Rica fits with the increased U.S. military role in Latin America, including the re-establishment of the Fourth Naval Fleet, the Pentagon’s deal to use seven military bases in Colombia, the occupation of Haiti, new bases in Panama, and an additional U.S. base in Honduras. It is part of Washington’s confrontation with the ALBA countries, including the recent coup attempt in Ecuador.

It is crucially important for the progressive and anti-war movement in the U.S. to actively oppose the U.S. government’s hostile actions in Latin America and the Caribbean. This should not be separated from the wars against Iraq and Afghanistan and the threats against Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Washington should not be allowed to use a border dispute to wage war against the peoples of Nicaragua and Costa Rica.

Email: bjceci@workers.org
Articles copyright 1995-2010 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

Fidel Castro: Evo's Speech "The Lights of Rebellion Are Illuminating Our Skies!"

A recent column by Fidel Castro extolls and quotes extensively from a recent speech by Socialist Evo Morales, President of Bolivia.
Read The Article Here!

Russia Today on "The Chavistas"

Ecuador: Socialists Retake Airport!

Former Marxist-Leninist Guerilla To Become Brazil's New President

By Hugh O'Shaughnessy

From: The Independent (UK)

Brazil looks likely to elect an extraordinary leader next weekend

The world's most powerful woman will start coming into her own next weekend. Stocky and forceful at 63, this former leader of the resistance to a Western-backed military dictatorship (which tortured her) is preparing to take her place as President of Brazil.

As head of state, president Dilma Rousseff would outrank Angela Merkel, Germany's Chancellor, and Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State: her enormous country of 200 million people is revelling in its new oil wealth. Brazil's growth rate, rivalling China's, is one that Europe and Washington can only envy.

Her widely predicted victory in next Sunday's presidential poll will be greeted with delight by millions. It marks the final demolition of the "national security state", an arrangement that conservative governments in the US and Europe once regarded as their best artifice for limiting democracy and reform. It maintained a rotten status quo that kept a vast majority in poverty in Latin America while favouring their rich friends.

Ms Rousseff, the daughter of a Bulgarian immigrant to Brazil and his schoolteacher wife, has benefited from being, in effect, the prime minister of the immensely popular President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the former union leader. But, with a record of determination and success (which includes appearing to have conquered lymphatic cancer), this wife, mother and grandmother will be her own woman. The polls say she has built up an unassailable lead - of more than 50 per cent compared with less than 30 per cent - over her nearest rival, an uninspiring man of the centre called Jose Serra. Few doubt that she will be installed in the Alvorada presidential palace in Brasilia in January.

Like President Jose Mujica of Uruguay, Brazil's neighbour, Ms Rousseff is unashamed of a past as an urban guerrilla which included battling the generals and spending time in jail as a political prisoner. As a little girl growing up in the provincial city of Belo Horizonte, she says she dreamed successively of becoming a ballerina, a firefighter and a trapeze artist. The nuns at her school took her class to the city's poor area to show them the vast gaps between the middle-class minority and the vast majority of the poor. She remembers that when a young beggar with sad eyes came to her family's door she tore a currency note in half to share with him, not knowing that half a banknote had no value.

Her father, Pedro, died when she was 14, but by then he had introduced her to the novels of Zola and Dostoevski. After that, she and her siblings had to work hard with their mother to make ends meet. By 16 she was in POLOP (Workers' Politics), a group outside the traditional Brazilian Communist Party that sought to bring socialism to those who knew little about it.

The generals seized power in 1964 and decreed a reign of terror to defend what they called "national security". She joined secretive radical groups that saw nothing wrong with taking up arms against an illegitimate military regime. Besides cosseting the rich and crushing trade unions and the underclass, the generals censored the press, forbidding editors from leaving gaps in newspapers to show where news had been suppressed.

Ms Rousseff ended up in the clandestine VAR-Palmares (Palmares Armed Revolutionary Vanguard). In the 1960s and 1970s, members of such organisations seized foreign diplomats for ransom: a US ambassador was swapped for a dozen political prisoners; a German ambassador was exchanged for 40 militants; a Swiss envoy swapped for 70. They also shot foreign torture experts sent to train the generals' death squads. Though she says she never used weapons, she was eventually rounded up and tortured by the secret police in Brazil's equivalent to Abu Ghraib, the Tiradentes prison in Sao Paulo. She was given a 25-month sentence for "subversion" and freed after three years. Today she openly confesses to having "wanted to change the world".

In 1973 she moved to the prosperous southern state of Rio Grande do Sul, where her second husband, Carlos Araujo, a lawyer, was finishing a four-year term as a political prisoner (her first marriage with a young left-winger, Claudio Galeno, had not survived the strains of two people being on the run in different cities). She went back to university, started working for the state government in 1975, and had a daughter, Paula.

In 1986, she was named finance chief of Porto Alegre, the state capital, where her political talents began to blossom. Yet the 1990s were bitter-sweet years for her. In 1993 she was named secretary of energy for the state, and pulled off the coup of vastly increasing power production, ensuring the state was spared the power cuts that plagued the rest of the country.

She had 1,000km of new electric power lines, new dams and thermal power stations built while persuading citizens to switch off the lights whenever they could. Her political star started shining brightly. But in 1994, after 24 years together, she separated from Mr Araujo, though apparently on good terms. At the same time she was torn between academic life and politics, but her attempt to gain a doctorate in social sciences failed in 1998.

In 2000 she threw her lot in with Lula and his Partido dos Trabalhadores, or Workers' Party which set its sights successfully on combining economic growth with an attack on poverty. The two immediately hit it off and she became his first energy minister in 2003. Two years later he made her his chief of staff and has since backed her as his successor. She has been by his side as Brazil has found vast new offshore oil deposits, aiding a leader whom many in the European and US media were denouncing a decade ago as a extreme left-wing wrecker to pull 24 million Brazilians out of poverty. Lula stood by her in April last year as she was diagnosed with lymphatic cancer, a condition that was declared under control a year ago. Recent reports of financial irregularities among her staff do not seem to have damaged her popularity.

Ms Rousseff is likely to invite President Mujica of Uruguay to her inauguration in the New Year. President Evo Morales of Bolivia, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and President Fernando Lugo of Paraguay - other successful South American leaders who have, like her, weathered merciless campaigns of denigration in the Western media - are also sure to be there. It will be a celebration of political decency - and feminism.

Female representation: A woman's place... is in the government

In recent years, female political representation has undergone significant growth, with dramatic changes occurring in unexpected corners of the globe. In some countries women are dominating cabinets and even parliamentary chambers. By comparison, the UK falls far behind, with only 22 per cent of seats in the Commons currently held by women.

Bolivia In the Bolivian cabinet, 10 men are now matched by 10 women. In 2009, women won 25 per cent of seats in the lower chamber, and 47 per cent in the upper chamber.

Costa Rica In 2010, women won 39 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Argentina In 2009, women won 39 per cent of seats in the lower chamber and 47 per cent in the upper chamber.

Cuba In 2009, women won 41 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Rwanda In 2009, women won 56 per cent of seats in the lower chamber and 35 per cent in the upper chamber.

Mozambique In 2009, women won 39 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Angola In 2009, women won 38 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Switzerland Has a female-dominated cabinet for the first time. In 2007, women won 29 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Germany In 2009, the cabinet had six women and 10 men. That year, women won 33 per cent of lower chamber seats.

Spain Nine women compared with eight men in cabinet. In 2008, women won 37 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Norway Equal numbers of men and women in the cabinet. Women won 40 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Denmark Nine women and 10 men in cabinet. In 2007, women won 23 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Netherlands Three women and nine men in cabinet. In 2010, women won 41 per cent of seats in the lower chamber.

Charlotte Sewell

Socialism Advances in Venezuelan Elections

from: Venezuela Analysis

by James Suggett

Mérida, September 27th 2010 – In Venezuela’s National Assembly elections on Sunday, opponents of President Hugo Chavez won approximately 20 fewer seats than they held during the 2000-2005 legislative term, while the pro-Chavez camp grew by several seats, Deputy-Elect Roy Chaderton said on Monday.

Chaderton said the opposition was setting up a “media farce” by comparing Sunday’s results only to those of the 2005 election, which the opposition boycotted, and thus reporting that that opposition drastically increased its presence in the National Assembly.

During the 2000-2005 legislative term, which was marked by an array of party splits and shifting alliances, pro-Chavez parties held between 83 and 92 seats at any given time, while opposition parties held between 73 and 82 seats, out of a total of 165.

According to the official results of Sunday’s election released by the National Electoral Council, Chavez’s United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) won 96 seats, while the opposition coalition Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD) won 63 seats. The center-left Fatherland for All (PPT) party, a former Chavez ally that split with the PSUV, won two seats. The three indigenous people’s representatives are not officially aligned with the PSUV or the MUD, but one is considered to be an ally of the PSUV, one an ally of the MUD, and one an ally of the PPT. The CNE has not yet announced the results in the contests for one last seat in Carabobo state.

Both PSUV and MUD officials reported non-official results on Monday. President Chavez said in a press conference that the PSUV and its allies won 98 seats. MUD leader Ramón Aveledo said MUD candidates received 52% of the total number of votes cast nation-wide. President Chavez refuted this claim, reporting that the PSUV and its allies received 5,422,040 votes and the MUD received 5,320,175 votes. The CNE has not confirmed any of these claims.

Officially, the PSUV won the majority of the seats in 16 of Venezuela’s 23 states. This included sweeping victories in the rural states of Apure, Barinas, Guarico, Cojedes, Lara, Portuguesa, Vargas, and Yaracuy; and strong victories in the major industrial states of Bolivar and Carabobo. The PSUV also won seven seats in the Capital District, compared to three for the MUD.

In Miranda state, where the capital city is located, the PSUV and the MUD each won three seats, with the MUD defeating the PSUV by a mere 741 votes out of a total of 968,947. The two were also tied with three seats each in Sucre state. In the sparsely populated and heavily forested Amazonas state, the PSUV won one seat, while the PPT won 2 seats and the MUD did not win any seats.

The MUD swept the border states of Tachira and Zulia, as well as Anzoátegui and the island state of Nueva Esparta.

According to an unofficial Venezuelanalysis calculation, approximately 10% of the 110 deputies who were elected as individuals were women.

Having won a majority of the National Assembly, the PSUV will be able to control the passage of ordinary laws and most other functions of the legislative body. However, the PSUV did not win a large enough majority to control the passage of organic laws, enabling laws that give decree power to the president, and some appointments to other branches of the government.

On Monday, MUD officials claimed victory in the elections, based mainly on their claim to have won the majority of the total votes cast on Sunday.

María Corina Machado, who was elected deputy of Miranda state, said the vote showed Venezuela’s disapproval of President Hugo Chavez’s presidency and its project of 21st Century Socialism, which the opposition says is emulating Cuba’s political system.

“Here it is very clear, Venezuela said no to Cuban-style communism, Venezuela said yes to the path of democratic construction and now we have the legitimacy of vote of the citizenry, we are the representatives of the people,” said Machado.

The PSUV also celebrated what it considered to be a victory. Vice President Elías Jaua, who is a PSUV official, said, “The revolution can count on a comfortable majority in the National Assembly... Few governments on our continent can count on such a comfortable majority of just one party.”

“The opposition does not have any possibility, with this number of deputies, of reversing the legislative processes that have been completed or activating destabilizing mechanisms such as revoking public powers or impeaching the president,” said Jaua.

PSUV Campaign Chief Aristóbulo Istúriz expressed disappointment that the goal of 110 seats was not reached. However, he said this should not distract from the “truly decisive victory” won by the PSUV, which “reaffirms us as the primary political force in our country.”

“We achieved our objective in the sense of being able to guarantee the defense of President Hugo Chavez and the policies of the revolutionary government, and having won sufficient forces to propel structural changes in this era of the construction of socialism,” said Istúriz.

Istúriz, who was elected deputy in the Capital District on Monday, called on the PSUV “to unite more than ever, to strengthen ourselves, because this is a long struggle, it is a daily struggle, it is a never ending battle and these legislators will be an important force in the construction of socialism.”

President Chavez, through his Twitter account, called the election “a solid victory, sufficient to continue deepening democratic and Bolivarian socialism.” He added, “We must continue strengthening the revolution!”

In a press conference on Monday night, Chavez said the next phase of his government will include “the acceleration of programs of the new historical, political, social, and technological project.”

Chavez said the results reflected what was predicted by recent polls and analysis, and as such, “nothing extraordinary happened. Something extraordinary would have been if we won 130 deputies, extraordinary would have been if we lost the majority.”

Polls over the past year consistently showed the PSUV’s popularity as a political party hovering in the mid-30th percentile, with opposition parties much weaker, and a large undecided population.

Meanwhile, the approval rating for Chavez’s presidency remained high at around 55% or 60%. This appears to have impacted the PSUV’s electoral campaign, which de-emphasized individual candidacies and framed the election as a vote of approval or disapproval of Chavez’s presidency. MUD candidates also focused on weaknesses of the Chavez government, such as rising crime and corruption, and made few if any policy proposals of their own.

Russia Today: "Why Does The U.S. Seek To Destabilze Venezuela?"

"The Real News" on Venezuelan Elections

Declaration from Marxist-Leninists in Latin America and the Carribean

Declaration of the Latin American and Caribbean Regional of the ICMLPO

It is not true that the present crisis of capitalism-imperialism is passing and in definitive recovery, as the spokespersons of imperialism proclaim. On the contrary, it is broadening and deepening in all the economies of the countries of the planet. This is strongly striking the productive, financial and commercial sectors. But mainly, it is attacking the lives of the workers in all continents, the dependent peoples and countries. Its most dramatic effects are seen in the tens of millions of workers dismissed, in the decline in wages and cuts in social services.

This crisis that broke out within U.S. imperialism has extended to all continents, without any country being able to escape it. Therefore, big capital and its governments are carrying out aggressive economic, political, social and military actions so that the dependent countries and people are the ones who pay for it. They are strengthening their invading armies and prepare regional wars such as in Iraq and Afghanistan, and supporting occupations such as that of Palestine by Israel.

However, in all countries and particularly in Europe, the working class and peoples are giving an important response with mobilizations and general strikes that show their rejection and their willingness to fight against the economic policies of imperialism and the bourgeois governments. The struggle of the working class and youth in Greece stands out.

The US is strengthening its role as an imperialist country, it is trying to assert its positions and continue its hegemony in Latin America. Facing the resistance of the peoples and the winning of important democratic and patriotic positions, it is strengthening its political and military offensive: in continuation of the implementation of Plan Colombia it is installing seven military bases, modernizing the Fourth Fleet and reintroducing it along the coasts of the Americas, it is implementing Plan Merida in Mexico, the coup in Honduras, the military occupation of Haiti, strengthening the blockade of Cuba, as well as the ideological and political offensive, promoting paramilitarism, anti-drug "operations," the militarization of the regimes, etc.

It is trying to recover the political and economic control of the democratic and patriotic countries and governments that denounce and confront it, using open and disguised mechanisms of intervention and aggression, the active processes of destabilization in Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua.

The imperialist countries of Europe, mainly Germany, England and Spain are expanding their direct investments and credits and are stimulating trade in the region. Several Latin American countries have adopted and others are discussing free trade agreements with the European Union. These relations of economic dependency transcend politics.
For several decades, Japanese imperialism has been extending its tentacles, primarily financial and commercial, in the region, making it one of the powers that is contending for domination of Latin America.

In recent years, Chinese imperialism has ventured with force into the various countries of Latin America. It is making direct investments in mining, oil, civil construction, etc. It is developing a commercial assault in all the countries and has become a creditor to the governments. The Chinese offensive in the region has grown significantly and it is contending with the United States and other imperialist countries.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, the crisis has serious repercussions, mainly on the poorest and most dependent countries. It is submerging the economies of the States in a drastic reduction of productive capacity, in serious fiscal deficits, in a general reduction of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP). It is causing an increase in the foreign debt, a rise in dismissals and unemployment, the growth of underemployment and of the informal sector. It is causing serious cutbacks in public spending and social security, and a furious onslaught against the political, economic, social and cultural gains. Although the crisis may show some fluctuations and signs of recovery, it has not yet touched bottom, it continues to sharpen and its social, economic and political effects affect the life of the countries and the conditions of the working classes, the peoples and youth of the continent.

For several years there has been a significant rise in the struggle of the masses. The popular movements are reviving, broadening and becoming increasingly politicized. The struggle in defense of sovereignty, against imperialism, for the defense of natural resources, against looting and indiscriminate exploitation is revitalizing the social movements. The confrontation against repression, the violation of human rights, the criminalization of the social struggles, the militarization and paramilitarism, coups d’état, the struggle for democracy and civil liberties are part of the action of the working masses and youth; the trade union movement is valiantly fighting against dismissals, for the right to work, for wage increases, in defense of the right to strike and collective bargaining, for the right to democratic unionization, for social security and decent pensions. The peasants are conducting vigorous struggles for land and their rights in all countries; the indigenous peoples are standing up, defending their rights and joining in the struggle for social change; the working women and ecologists are joining their actions in the process of emancipation of the workers and peoples.

The rise of the struggle of the masses is coming together with the failure and exhaustion of neoliberal policies, with the sharpening of the contradictions among the bourgeoisie and among the imperialists, creating new scenarios and conditions that are favorable to the development of class combats of the working masses, of the peoples and youth, for the work of the left-wing and revolutionary organizations and parties.
The demands of the struggle of the masses do not have only had the stamp of defense of their gains, but they have developed a content for change. This aspiration is deepening and is being projected into the electoral political struggle, expressed in the vote for the parties and organizations that propose change, for the proposals of the left, helping to elect democratic and progressive governments, some of which are holding high positions in defense of sovereignty, of the rights of the peoples and are fighting against imperialist domination and the attacks of internal reaction, such as in Venezuela and Bolivia. On the other hand, the pressure of imperialism and reaction is causing several of those governments to fall into reformist and developmental policies, of conciliation with imperialism and the oligarchies; they are moving to the right, and consequently are confronting and repressing the trade union movement, the social organizations, the indigenous peoples, the left-wing organizations and revolutionary forces, as is happening in Ecuador with the Correa government.

This social and political process, the development of the struggle of the masses, the involvement of significant sectors of the middle strata and classes, is coming together in the formation and development of a Tendency for Patriotic, Progressive and Left-Wing Change that is influencing the social and political life of all countries, to varying degrees and levels.

This Tendency is expressed in the development of the anti-imperialist consciousness of the workers and peoples, in the decision to fight for the government, for social change. Within this Tendency the revolutionary ideas, the decision to fight for the overthrow of imperialism, the destruction of capitalism and the building of socialism are expressed vigorously and in development; in this task our Marxist-Leninist parties, together with other revolutionary organizations, are fulfilling our responsibilities.
In this new scenario, the development of the social struggle, the affirmation and growth of proletarian revolutionary positions, of the Marxist-Leninist forces, are faced with the responsibility of unmasking and fighting against all sorts of theses and proposals of a reformist and diversionist character within the workers and popular movement. Some of them are exhibited by the governments; in particular, we must pay attention to the so-called "citizen’s revolution,” "Bolivarian revolution," the preaching of peaceful revolution, of the revolution by the "vote,” of "21st century socialism." These circumstances place on the agenda the ideological and political struggle between revolution and reformism.

The development of the Tendency for Change is changing the relationship of forces in Latin America, it has led to the existence of several democratic and progressive governments at the same time that, as a response of imperialism and reaction, it is building openly pro-imperialist governments such as those of Colombia, Mexico and Peru.
The momentum of the struggle of the workers and peoples, the consistent positions of several governments and the willingness of others to renegotiate dependency are giving rise to the emergence of anti-U.S. political initiatives at the level of countries and governments, such as ALBA (Bolivarian Alliance the Americas), the organization of Latin American and Caribbean States, excluding the U.S. and Canada. There is also the formation of UNASUR (Union of Nations of South America), the establishment of the Bank of the South, and a virtual currency, the Sucre, as a means of payment for trade between member countries. We proletarian revolutionaries support these initiatives, as part of the confrontation with the imperialist policies of the U.S., while we warn of their limits and we work to assert the anti-imperialist consciousness of the peoples in their struggle for social and national liberation.

We Marxist-Leninists take into account the development of the social and political struggle, their advances and achievements, we are present in all arenas; we fully support the various progressive and patriotic measures while we warn of the illusions that they can arouse among the masses. We insist that real change will come about as a result of the overthrow of imperialism, of the burial of capitalism by means of the organization of the social revolution, of the seizure of power by the revolutionary road and with the building of socialism.

To organize the revolution we must lead the working class and peoples in the struggle against the crisis and its effects. We insist that the definitive solution of the crisis, for the benefit of the workers, will only happen with the revolution and socialism. Any other alternative only means palliatives, proposals for the recomposition of capitalism. This statement in no way means to stand idly by in dealing with the effects of the crisis on the working masses. It demands that we stand up, at the forefront of the struggle of the working class, of all those exploited and oppressed by capital and imperialism to struggle against dismissals, for the rise in wages, for non-payment of the foreign debt, against the sell-out policy of the governments, for the building of a revolutionary confluence with the working class at the head, involving the peasantry, the poor, the indigenous peoples and the youth; for the affirmation of the ideas of change, for the ideals of the revolution and socialism

Let the rich, the ones responsible, pay for the crisis!

To the crisis, the only solution is revolution!

Workers of the world, unite!!

Latin America and Caribbean Regional of the International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations

Revolutionary Communist Party of Brazil, Communist Party of Colombia (Marxist-Leninist), Communist Party of Labor of the Dominican Republic, Marxist Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador, Communist Party of Mexico (Marxist-Leninist), Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Venezuela

July 2010