Some aspects of Ch
I read
in a Spanish newspaper that President Hugo Chávez’s proposal
for a constitutional reform is a way to remain indefinitely in power.
That’s possible. Except that he would have to be elected repeatedly
by the Venezuelan people. Therefore, an indefinite mandate does not
depend exactly on him but on the popular acceptance he will have.
Chávez has already been elected four times, if we include the
famous recall referendum of 2004, which turned out to be a vote of
confidence on his administration.
Most of
the Venezuelan news media opposed to Chávez’s proposal call it
a coup d’état. If that were so, it would be the strangest coup
in history, because the reform bill was sent to Parliament, where it
will be debated, passed or amended by the legislators, and from there
it will go to the barrios, towns, cities and rural areas for
discussion. Later, it will be put to a popular referendum.
Chávez
proposed 33 changes to the Constitution, among them a proposal that
the president be elected for seven years and as many times as the
Venezuelan people wish it. "A play to perpetuate himself in
power," some say. What they don’t say is that Chávez
leaves his re-election in the hands of the people.
By
Eduardo Dimas Read Spanish Version
I read
in a Spanish newspaper that President Hugo Chávez’s proposal
for a constitutional reform is a way to remain indefinitely in power.
That’s possible. Except that he would have to be elected repeatedly
by the Venezuelan people. Therefore, an indefinite mandate does not
depend exactly on him but on the popular acceptance he will have.
Chávez has already been elected four times, if we include the
famous recall referendum of 2004, which turned out to be a vote of
confidence on his administration.
Most of
the Venezuelan news media opposed to Chávez’s proposal call it
a coup d’état. If that were so, it would be the strangest coup
in history, because the reform bill was sent to Parliament, where it
will be debated, passed or amended by the legislators, and from there
it will go to the barrios, towns, cities and rural areas for
discussion. Later, it will be put to a popular referendum.
Chávez
proposed 33 changes to the Constitution, among them a proposal that
the president be elected for seven years and as many times as the
Venezuelan people wish it. "A play to perpetuate himself in
power," some say. What they don’t say is that Chávez
leaves his re-election in the hands of the people.
Until
now, the presidential elections in Venezuela have been the most
monitored in the world, overseen by international institutions such
as the Organization of American States or the Carter Foundation. In
every instance, it was impossible for anyone to charge fraud or show
the government coerced the opposition.
The
latest elections, in December 2006, gave Chávez more than 60
percent of the votes, despite the enormous campaign conducted against
him by the printed press, radio and television in the hands of the
Venezuelan bourgeoisie. And despite the millions of dollars the U.S.
government gave to the opposition, according to a confession by
former U.S. Ambassador William R. Brownfield.
Among
the boldest reforms proposed by Chávez is considering the
Popular Power as one of the components of the state. What does this
mean? It means that the barrio governments, both in the city and
rural areas, will have a degree of decision over the problems that
involve them, as well as the resources to solve them, after
conciliating efforts with the municipal popular power. They would
become self-governing communes.
The rest
of the structure of government would be composed of the
aforementioned Municipal Power, the State Power (the power of the
states that form the country) and the National Power or national
government. Also, the Public Power is organized in the Executive,
Legislative, Judicial, Citizen and Electoral powers. In addition, it
creates the posts of regional vice presidents.
Chávez’s
proposal posits a change of huge proportions in what it has been
Venezuela’s form of government. Also, it changes the state, municipal
and national structures. The latter would be composed of a Federal
District (which would contain the capital of the republic), the
states, the maritime regions, the federal territories, the federal
municipalities, the insular districts and the communes.
Chávez
also proposes introducing into the Constitution a law forbidding the
exploitation of workers, creating a Social Stability Fund that will
guarantee the workers such basic rights as retirement, pensions,
vacations, rest and economic guarantees to pregnant women, both pre-
and post-partum. The law would reduce the workday to six hours and
would forbid employers to force their employees to work overtime.
The
reform contemplates a ban on unproductive land, as well as a ban on
the private exploitation of hydrocarbons in all their forms. It would
forbid the exploitation of goods and services used for the public
interest or of a strategic nature.
It
should be noted that none of these reforms, except those that defend
the interests of the workers, are new in the capitalist system. In
some developed countries that established the fading "welfare
society," the measures were even more drastic.
What’s
most important for those who want to know what 21st-Century socialism
will be is that Chávez proposes that the Constitution should
accept five forms of property: public, social, collective, mixed and
private.
Public
property belongs to the state organizations. Social, to the people as
a whole. Collective property is owned by social groups or groups of
persons. Mixed property is composed of public and private capital.
The bill
also guarantees private property, which belongs to natural or legal
persons. In other words, the reform proposal respects the private
ownership of the means of production. What it prevents is the
systematic exploitation of the workers.
When
submitting the reforms to Parliament, Chávez addressed the
businessmen: "Entrepreneurs, private sector, you are not
excluded. We need you as allies. Together we shall build the great
country that Venezuela is becoming. This is a concept that allows all
of us to join together in cooperation!"
This is
not the first time that Chávez makes such a call to the
Venezuelan bourgeoisie and the transnational corporations. It seems
that the bourgeois mentality and the class interests (selfish as they
are) prevent them from understanding the message, which, far from
harming them, would benefit them in the long run.
What
happens is that they have to renounce to something that has been
their raison d’être: the control of the state, which now passes
to the hands of the people. In his radio program "Hello,
president" of Aug. 19, Chávez denounced plans by the
opposition and the CIA to impede the approval and application of the
reforms.
There
are other reform proposals, but these seem to me to be the most
important and significant. I think you realize that, if they are
approved, they will transform the nation’s structure of government
and will grant the Venezuelan people a participation and leading role
never before seen in any other country. The problem lies in applying
these attributes and making them work.
It is
evident that Chávez proposes revolutionary changes, and
revolution is a work of social engineering that transforms the
economic, political and social structure of a country, producing
successes and failures. Successes are important, but so are failures,
because it is not possible to eliminate them and they always have
their consequences, their sequels, which drag on for years, sometimes
for decades.
Avoiding
the mistakes made by other revolutions that built (or attempted to
build) socialism is something that Chávez has advised on
multiple occasions. The same mistakes may not be made, but some
mistakes will be, because revolutions (to use a truism) are the work
of men, not of machines.
So the
questions we should ask are two: Does Chávez have cadres
sufficiently trained to carry out those reforms? Are the Venezuelan
people prepared to govern, to conduct a Bolivarian revolution of
social justice and equity for all?
The
ballast represented by the ideas of capitalism, of individualism, is
present in Venezuela, as it is everywhere else in the world. To get
rid of that ballast, to create the new type of man Chávez
talks about is no easy task.
First,
because it is easier to think in the interests of individuals than in
the interests of collectives. Second, because to create that "new
man" you need "educators," who in turn "need to
be educated," as stated with extraordinary vision by Karl Marx
in a thesis about Feuerbach.
Beyond
constitutional reforms, that’s the major challenge before Chávez.
And that’s the main reason why Chávez must remain at the helm
of the Venezuelan government as long as he can, while the people —
who have been the major beneficiaries of his work — understand the
challenge. And
it seems they do, don’t you think?
