Aussie-Ven Solidarity Network: "Another Vote for the Revolution and Chavez"

[magbana]

Venezuela’s regional elections: Another vote for the revolution and Chavez

A statement from the Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Network

November 25, 2008



The results of the elections for local mayors and state governors held in Venezuela on November 23 underlined the continuing mass support for the Bolivarian revolution led by President Hugo Chavez.



In a clear vote of confidence in the project to build socialism of the 21st century in Venezuela, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) - formed just six months ago with Chavez as its president - won 17 of the 22 states in which governors were elected. The United States-backed right-wing opposition won five states with a total of about 4 million votes, compared to the 5.5 million votes for the PSUV candidates.



The elections were also a victory for democracy in Venezuela. The voter turn-out was the highest ever in regional elections, with 65.45% of those eligible casting their vote (compared to 45% in the last regional elections in 2004). Despite some opposition leaders threatening not to recognize the results if voting hours were extended, polling centres were kept open until 10.30pm in some places to ensure that everyone waiting in the long queues was able to vote, and international observers report that it was a completely free and fair ballot.



Jim McIlroy, a participant in the Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Network brigade currently in Venezuela who observed the voting at polling booths in Caracas, said: “There was a festive atmosphere at the booths, but it was also highly politicised: the people were taking their democratic right to vote very seriously.



“The computerised voting sytem is far more advanced than that used in Australia, and its ability to guarantee the accuracy of the whole process clearly has the confidence of the people.”



After the close of polls, Chavez congratulated the Venezuelan people for participating in the elections in a “civic and joyful” manner, saying that the process ratified Venezuelan democracy, but not the “democracy of before”, which “belonged to the elites”.



Overall, the November 23 vote for the PSUV – for the revolution and socialism - increased by about 1.3 million on the pro-revolution vote in the Constitutional reforms referendum last December. In contrast, the anti-revolution opposition’s comparative vote declined by about 300,000. As well, the Chavez suporters won back three states (Aragua, Guarico and Sucre) in which the incumbent governors had, over the last 18 months, defected to the opposition.



However, the sharp polarisation of Venezuelan society and the hard struggle still facing the poor majority to defend the gains of the revolution and realise their dream of a new socialist Venezuela is evident in the fact that the opposition, which won only two states in 2004 (oil-rich Zulia, and Nueva Esparta), this time won three more from Chavez supporters (Miranda, Tachira, Carabobo). The opposition also won the position of mayor of Greater Caracas and now controls four of Caracas’s five municipalities, although the largest and poorest municipality, Libertador, was re-won by the pro-revolution candidate.



Already in control of 95% of the media in Venezuela, the right wing will without a doubt use these victories to escalate their ongoing campaign to overthrow Chavez, and undermine the Bolivarian revolution. As was exposed just a month before the regional elections, they will stop at nothing to halt the revolutionary process, including another military coup and the assassination of Chavez.



Capitalist media around the world, including in Australia, are supporting their campaign to discredit and destabilise Venezuela’s revolutionary government. An AFP report by Sophie Nicholson, for example, which was uncritically regurgitated in the Melbourne Age newspaper on November 24, pedalled blatant lies about the regional elections.



“Mr Chavez”, it stated, “has threatened to imprison opponents, or even send tanks onto the streets, if his party loses in the populous northwestern state of Carabobo”. In fact, Chavez said that the government would mobilise the military if there were destablisation attempts around the elections: a scenario that was not out of the question given the opposition’s constant public calls in national media for the violent overthrow of Chavez and his government.



The Age article also claimed that “about 300 candidates, mainly from the opposition, have been prevented from running in the elections”. In fact, those barred from contesting were not mostly opposition candidates, and all were disqualified after investigations found them guilty of corruption.



Demolishing these and the numerous other efforts to paint him as some sort of “dictator”, Chavez immediately acknowledged the opposition’s victory in Carabobo, and the other four states. In doing so, however, he urged the opposition to behave democratically: “I hope you devote yourself to understand the people, govern with transparency, honesty and respect for the national government and the institutions of those states and municipalities. If you do so, you will deserve our acknowledgement; if you do not, the Constitution of the Republic will be imposed on you.”



Of the 17 governorships won by the PSUV, eight were won with at least 60% of the vote and most of the others were won with a more than 10% margin on the closest rival. In the local municipalty elections, which were held at the same time, the average vote for Chavista candidates was even stronger.



Despite the many difficulties and contradictions confronting the revolution, it is clear that the great majority of Venezuelans want the process of transferring resources and power to the poor majority to continue.



Chavez summed it up when he said that these election results ratify that “the path is the construction of socialism, and we have to deepen it”.



www.venezuelasolidarity.org



_______________________________________________

[Peace Patriot]

1. It's refreshing to read what actually happened. We have to read between the lines of

the corpo/fascist 'news' monopolies, as they desperately try to 'spin' an overwhelming endorsement of the Chavez government somehow as a 'loss' because the rightwing/fascist, U.S./Bushwhack backed opposition didn't boycott the elections. Chavez's party won SEVENTEEN of twenty-two governorships, and TWO THIRDS of the mayoralties. The opposition's wins were minor, by comparison, and mostly the result of their decision to participate in the elections--elections that have been universally proclaimed as honest and aboveboard by all international election monitors for many election cycles, including this one. The opposition's violent coups and strikes and other U.S. funded anti-democratic activities didn't work. So now, with their advantage in Venezuela's mostly corpo/fascist media, they've tried voting, and their true cache with the Venezuelan people turns out to be about one third support, an expectable result.

But, naturally--since they are anti-democratic in their core beliefs, they found some excuse to cry "fraud" because the National Electoral Council kept the polls open late in response to long lines (a big increase in voter turnout)--a quite normal procedure in any democracy. It's as if they have to keep their lies, and their corpo/fascist lying 'news' networks, exercised for future use.

If our corpo/fascist 'news' monopolies are any guide, the danger of a U.S. oil war in this hemisphere remains very high. They don't engage in this level of intense psyops and disinformation for no reason. And thus far, Barack Obama's appointments to his new administration bode ill as well. Granted, he's not even president yet, and has only been president-elect for 20 days. But indications are, at the very least, pointing to economic warfare and continued efforts at "divide and conquer" (as preached by Donald Rumsfeld in a 12/1/07 op-ed in the Washington Post: "The Smart Way to Defeat Tyrants like Chavez"). Obama has appointed people to very high positions with close ties to the fascist thugs running Colombia, where government, military and Chiquita International's death squads have been running rampant (Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder), and to other malefactors in South America (Gregory Craig). On top of his other 'neoliberal' appointments (for instance, Larry Summers), it seems pretty clear that the U.S. will continue to view South America as our global corporate predators' "back yard" where they experiment with looting, plundering and police state tactics before they impose them here.

South America is just now recovering from the sort of Financial 9/11 that the Bushwhacks pulled off here a month ago. They got hit with it a decade ago. Now us. The people of South America responded with a magnificent democracy movement which has swept leftist (majorityist) governments into office all over the continent. They are now on a strong path of economic/political recovery as a result (and are in much better shape than we are to weather the U.S. Financial 9/11). Our people have tried to do the same, but our system is highly rigged, with fascist corporations actually 'counting' all our votes with 'TRADE SECRET' code and near 100% non-transparency. So all we are permitted to do is elect more corpo/fascists, albeit with a nicer face. Obama is no FDR, as far as these 20 days of preparation can tell us. And, with our voting system the way it is, the global corporate predators can easily oust him, if he threatens to become one. That may be why he's surrounding himself with pro-war, corpo/fascist, DLC 'Democrats,' and has bought into their policies, including the Forever War (now moving to Afghanistan) and has readily endorsed minting about a trillion dollars to hand to our financial terrorists. We come second, if there is anything left over. We will get various fiddlings and mitigations, with our global corporate predators continuing to loot whatever comes our way--health care still run by the insurance corps, 'green' jobs run by the auto and construction corps, and the oil corps, and the military run by Dyncorp, Halliburton and Bechtel (and the oil corps). No serious reform, such as the many leftist governments of South America have initiated.

And looting and plundering Latin America has always been high on the list of corpo/fascist priorities. The Bush junta has tried to cause huge trouble in South America, toward that end--and has largely succeeded in Colombia--where the rightwing death squads rule--but has failed miserably everywhere else. Now it's Obama and the Clinton team's turn to try to destroy democracy there and regain U.S. corporate predator control. That's sure seems to be where they're heading. In Venezuela--as throughout South America--the leftist government is very popular. This election demonstrates that once again, though you wouldn't know it from our corpo/fascist propaganda mill.

[Judi Lynn]

2. Open Letter to the U.S. Media: The biased coverage of Venezuela´s regional elections

Open Letter to the U.S. Media: The biased coverage of Venezuela´s regional elections


Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in the United States.-


On Sunday, November 23rd, Venezuelans voted in regional elections, in a historic turnout of 65.5%, to elect governors, mayors, and members of legislative councils. In the days leading up to the elections and in post-election analysis, some mainstream media outlets have stepped up their biased coverage of Venezuela.

It is astonishing that some media outlets insist on misleadingly portraying the elections as a defeat for the government. While it is true that the opposition won 5 governorships and some mayoralties, the President’s party, PSUV, won 17 of 22 states. In every case, pro-government candidates won by wide margins. Winning in over 75 percent of states would be considered a landslide victory in any other country in the world. It should be noted that prior to Sunday, just 15 of the 22 states holding gubernatorial elections were led by pro-government officials.

Moreover, contrary to claims made in the New York Times editorial of November 25th, 57% of Venezuela’s population will be led by a governor aligned with President Chávez. The results of mayoralties are even more pronounced: supporters of President Chávez won 80% of those races. Even in states where the opposition won the governorship, support for the President remains strong. For example, in the state of Carabobo, PSUV candidates won 11 of 13 races for mayor (the results of one race have yet to be announced), including the capital of the state, Valencia, an important industrial city; and the city of Puerto Cabello, the country’s main port. Pro-Chavez mayors are in the majority in at least four of the five states won by the opposition (a few municipal results in Zulia have yet to be announced). Furthermore, pro-government candidates won every state with hydroelectric power, a strategic economic force for the country, as well as the gigantic reservoir of the Orinoco belt, and states important for basic industries.

In the days prior to the elections, some media outlets irresponsibly speculated that President Chávez would undemocratically consolidate his power regardless of the results. Given that this has clearly not been the case, more emphasis should have been put on the smoothness of the elections, the independence and transparency of the Electoral Power (CNE), as well as the strength of Venezuela’s democracy. Furthermore, as soon as the CNE announced the results, President Chávez congratulated victorious opposition candidates and recognized their wins; the government of Venezuela has always respected the outcome of every vote. We invite everyone to view the elections’ results on the CNE’s website. These results have been accessible since the day after the election.

Despite this clear respect for democratic principles and practice, a Washington Post editorial on Tuesday called President Chávez a “caudillo” and a “strongman” while also claiming that voters delivered a “rebuff” to the government by electing several opposition governors. Free, fair and transparent elections do not take place in authoritarian countries; the media should cease its irresponsible characterizations of President Chávez and should recognize that Venezuela has a vibrant democracy and an exemplary electoral system.

Although this Washington Post editorial had misleading analysis of the elections, it correctly emphasized that the opposition must avoid shortcuts. This is an important point because the Venezuelan opposition has lost electoral races and political leverage in the past due to their anti-democratic tactics. These offices could be recovered by engaging in democracy. A commitment by the opposition to working within the law would be good for Venezuelan democracy.

Finally, although there are remaining challenges, there are sound reasons why millions of Venezuelans continue to vote for the government of President Chavez, including reductions in poverty and inequality, greater educational opportunities, increased healthcare access and political participation. However, these facts are rarely mentioned in the media. By neglecting the millions of Venezuelans who support the President, the media is portraying an unrealistic vision of the country. President Chávez has expressed hope that the election of Barack Obama might signal the beginning of a relationship based on mutual respect. Yet this may become harder to accomplish if U.S. public opinion, and the incoming administration, are swayed by the media’s bias.

http://www.embavenez-us.org/news.php?nid=4695