churresmo [she/her, they/them]

But even if it sucks, we have to look at the actual context of the society in which the revolution is happening. And because this is the path that Venezuela took, it wasn’t a path built with the militarism that has given the DPRK, for example, the mandate to stand up to America in the face of serious threat.

I disagree, in part. Venezuela is pretty militaristic, probably the most of any Latin America country, followed by Nicaragua, Cuba, El Salvador and Colombia (back when the right-wing ruled over, that’s it ; idk how Petro talks with the military, but I would guess isn’t a good relationship). But yeah, DPRK is way more militaristic, some of which is out of necessity, due to imperialism occupying half their country.

If you’re correct and enough people in Venezuela are opposed to this (and to be clear, as short-term concessions run the risk of turning to long-term subjugation, and the material conditions in Venezuela deteriorate from increased exploitation, it is very likely that larger groups of people become convinced of the necessity for desperate action as time goes on), then a new form of revolution in Venezuela may very well grow.

I haven’t got privileged info. I’m just expecting history to repeat itself. In 2014, some Chavistas broke with Maduro and PSUV, dissatisfied with Maduro’s economic policy, actually launched armed struggle, which was unsuccessful. I would say that, since this economic decision is way more important than the former, there will be more splintering. But, that’s just a guess.

Ultimately, that is usually what people come to find in the question of reform or revolution. Reform is a means, not an end, and once reform is made impossible by the impositions of capital, revolution becomes necessary. But I can’t blame someone for wanting a way forward that doesn’t come with the brutality through which the DPRK was forged. For a lot of people, even if they might think intellectually that the long suffering of exploitation is just as painful and deadly, emotionally they aren’t ready to relinquish a chance at a peaceful path.

I agree. Nobody wants to go through what the DPRK went. Perhaps I’m overreacting, but, as a Latin American, I feel almost as if the 70’s is back. The right-wing is on offensive in all countries, and the left keeps doing dumb shit. And it’s very terrifying seeing reformism crumbles, because every progressive person becomes a target of the reaction. It happened in Colombia after Gaitan got killed, it happened in Brazil when Goulart was deposed, it happened in Chile when Allende was overthrown. And I fear the same for Venezuela, if the leadership doesn’t changes course immediately. Of course, they know more about Venezuela than me, but there’s always that feeling that the leadership might have sold out the people. It happened before the nearby countries.

Thanks for taking time to respond. And I apologize for my rudeness. Stay well.

You’re relying a bit much on reducing revolutions to specific figures, and not the will of the people.

Fairs. Now that you mentioned it, it wasn’t just Ho and Kim, but millions of people who upheld the leadership of these two people. The Korean and Vietnamese peoples wanted those revolutions to occur, after all they went through in WWII.

But Venezuela does not have a base of people to do the same, nor the same circumstances. The Bolivarian revolution was not a bunch of armed insurgents building a base of people willing to die in large numbers, to fight to the death. It was a a peaceful transition through electoralism and reform.

I agree somewhat to the first sentence, the second one is stating a fact, and my problem is with the third one, although it is also a fact. Latin American reformism didn’t accomplish anything in the 1960-70s. It only prevented communists from doing revolution, delve them into the romantic path of reform, and that got most of them killed or severely tortured. The second coming of reformism in Latin America in the 2000’s barely accomplished anything. The few reforms that were passed where quickly reversed, and these governments all lost power, except in Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela. I fear the same thing happens again. PT will never take power again after Lula dies, and Petro’s sucessor will be in a tough spot (that’s if he actually wins). Venezuela basically had the only Pink Tide government remaining. They could learn from these past experiences and realizes that electoralism won’t be enough. Or if they don’t realize this, perhaps the PCV or other org could do it (the surrender of PSUV doesn’t surprises me, but PCV’s apathy in all of this is appalling. Seems that everything they do these days is scream “Hands Off PCV” in Solidnet, which doesn’t has any power).

The thing that I’m very convinced is that the Chavista rank-and-file in last December/this month were ready for a step forward: their massive mobilization alone could scare off an US invasion. Instead, the Chavista leadership took a step backwards, and essentially submitted to the US. And i bet 100% that people won’t like this. I fully expect PSUV or its coalition to splinter into a electoralist party fully loyal to Delcy Rodriguez, with some smaller orgs derived from PSUV attempting to reclaim some dignity in the people’s eyes.

As for PSUV, their destiny is sealed. They will follow the same path of MAS.

edit: also, thanks for actually engaging with my comment. the other people weren’t doing that.

I’m not Western. I just want the Chavista leadership not to cheat their support base.

Edit: also, resisting Western agression with arms was something that even some Chavistas thought was possible. Look up Fuerzas Bolivarianas de Liberacion.

Imagine if Ho Chi Minh and Kim Il-sung thought like this. They might as well lay down arms and ask for a seat in Parliament.

An insurgency is a very extreme situation, which may cost tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of lives. I hate that sort of thing, but Venezuela didn’t have many options. It was their chance to prove to the Venezuelan people that are actual anti-imperialists, that they actually believe in the ideology they propagated for two decades. Instead, the Chavistas are giving oil to the Americans, their base will dwindle by the day, and sooner or later, regime chance will happen, when the Chavistas no longer have anything to offer.

Also, imagine being a Chavista supporter rn. Your country was sanctioned, demonized worldwide, millions had to leave the country due to the same sanctions, and some tens of thousands died directly because of the sanctions. All this suffering, all this pain, so in the end, Delcy Rodrigues can give away everything that Chavez and Maduro, even with their class limits, builded. If you ask me, i don’t think the Chavistas will take the surrender of their leadership too well. Especially since some of them have guns now.

What would any communist do: resist with every mean possible, while building new power. Retreat to the forest if needed. But never abandon the people. This decision of Rodriguez might have costed everything. The only thing the Chavistas had was the support of sections of Venezuelan society in a righteous anti-imperialist struggle. Now what do they have? An army commanded by traitors and the distrust of the people.

In my view Venezuela continues to be the single most effective AES state on the planet, barring China.

AES is when you privatize the biggest company of your biggest export.

AES is when you bow down to the megachurches of Edir Macedo, and to the shady investments of Joesley Batista.

AES is when you discredit Mao and ignore everything he said and fought for in his last 10 years of life.

AES is when you arm fascists in Nepal, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Indonesia to kill oppressed ethnic groups and revolutionaries,so you can do “win-win partnerships”.

AES doesn’t means anything nowadays.

Who would have guessed that the Chavistas were going to back down and submit back into American imperialism? Ain’t like bourgueois-reformist ideologies do this all the time in Latin America, ever since Goulart in 60’s Brazil.

do you mean Jair Bolsonaro? He left the hospital early this year, to a comfy special prison cell.

30 Bolsonaro supporters injured after lightining strike during demonstration at Brasília - The Mirror

something something read Settlers something

Edit: legit, read Settlers, it is refreshing.

I’m mostly using as source this interview of Ricardo Capelli, president of the Brasilian Agency of Industrial Development (ABDI) to Agência Brasil. Has some interesting numbers there.

And here are some stats from the Brazilian Confederation of Industry

Edit: Isn’t a big ass industrialisation, but we aren’t becoming a big ass farm, like Jones Manoel and PSOListas are saying.

Also, i saw those protests. It’s a “March for Liberty”, led by the far-right main name among the youth, Nikolas Ferreira.

I can only talk about the Brazilian POV:

Brazilian agribusiness will be the biggest beneficiary. They are the main supporters of the Brazilian far-right since “redemocratization” in 1985. Since Brazilian agribusiness is very indebted, i guess they will receive more credit, so they can expand their farms in the North, Center-West and Northeast of Brazil, expanding their profits. The expansion of agribusiness in those regions means more deforestation and invasion of Indigenous and peasant land.

The Indigenous movement is not buying the PT government narrative and their abandonment of the Indigenous cause. Thus, in Pará state (in the North), there were some protests last year. Their movement is by far, more progressive than the government. The peasant movement is a bit different, since their main organization, MST, is firmly on the government’s side, although even they (sometimes) recognize the government’s inaction towards land reform. Smaller peasant organizations, who are critical of the government, like FNL and LCP, are getting criminalized by regional authorities, with members being arrested as “land invaders” or even “gang members”. Indigenous, maroons and peasants will be the biggest losers of this deal, since their existence is endangered.

Brazilian industrial capitalists didn’t oppose the deal. There were some initial criticism about it, but they will gain more than lose, with the deal, since Mercosul industrial exports will gain tariff exemption in the EU. This is where most “Marxist” analysis get it wrong. They assume that the trade deal will only benefit the agribusiness, and de-industrialize Brazil further (even tho, de-industrialization is being reversed in this PT administration), but they forget that the industrialists aren’t opposing the deal. There’s a Folha de São Paulo article talking more about it, but it is paywalled. But TLDR: Industrial capitalists will gain a new market for their products.

The mostly-white petite-bourgeoisie, mostly located in the Southeast/South will benefit somewhat from the deal, with access to cheaper higher-end products from Europe.

The reality is almost certainly going to be something much more stupid and liberal rather than something hopeful and anti imperialist but I can dream

Has been like this for almost 50 years.

International-bourgeoisie? Russian national-bourgeoisie controlling the Russian state? Are you reading Lenin or Pepe Escobar?

Imperialism is capitalism in that stage of development in which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital has established itself; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun; in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.

V. I. Lenin, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky>

If you zoom out and picture the empire as one polity and this is the literal balkanisation of the western empire. They may be oppressor nations but encouraging that is progressive no matter whether or not the country remains shitty and capitalist afterwards.

I’m not understanding your point of view. There’s American imperialism, British imperialism, European (mostly Franco-German, with a bunch of junior partners) imperialism, Russian imperialism and so on. All are independent of each other. Imperialists sometimes team up with other imperialists, when they have common goals, and sometimes, they fight each other, when the objectives aren’t common.

Oppressor nations can’t do progressive nationalism. And i doubt most nationalisms in the modern-day are progressive.

EU, Mercosur bloc sign free trade deal after 25 years of negotiations - Al-Jazeera

The ultra-reactionary agricultural bourgeoisie of South America will really appreciate this lifeline offered by the EU (and Lula). They will probably use this money to better equip their death squads.

deleted by creator

CPI-M’s likely fall in the elections later this year will largely be linked to economic issues, which are particularly hard to fix given the constraints they are under.

If they can’t fix these issues, what is the point of disputing elections and getting elected, especially using Marxist symbology and terminology? And I’m not advocating for these other communist parties either.

Being pro-Palestine doesn’t absolves anyone of being chauvinistic. Just ask a Moroccan what they think of Palestine, and what think of Western Sahara, for example. I normally don’t take Jacobin seriously, but they showed actual issues with CPI-M’s attitude towards Muslims, and it has terrible electoral consequences. Fascism growing in Kerala, as BJP elected their first state representative to Parliament in 2024. At the same time, the CPI(“Marxist”)'s results amongst the Muslim population in Kerala aren’t good, even with they opposing the CAA.

In the same election that elected a actual Hindu fascist to power, one would expect that Muslims would prefer to vote for the Left, which one would expect to be able to stand up against Hindutva chauvinism. But they mostly voted for the INC-allied Muslim League. Also, one of the websites the Jacobin linked implies that CPI(“M”)/LDF and BJP/RSS have some sort of link, both in their hate of Muslims, and in their love of Adani.