[R-G] Why the Venezuelan Amendment Campaign Is So Important

[Anthony Fenton]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t ))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A Socialist Project e-bulletin ... No. 185 ... February 14, 2009
__________________________________________________

Why the Venezuelan Amendment Campaign
Is So Important

Diana Raby

Sunday, 15 February, Venezuelans vote in a referendum on a proposed  
Constitutional Amendment that will allow for any candidate to stand  
for the Presidency, or indeed for any elective office, without  
restriction on the number of terms they may serve. Only the people's  
vote will decide whether they are elected and how many terms they serve.

In other words, if President Hugo Chavez, who is already serving his  
second term under the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, wishes to  
stand for a third term, he may do so. Equally, the opposition mayor of  
Greater Caracas, Antonio Ledezma, may stand three or four times if he  
wants (and if the people vote for him).

This is no different from the practice here in the UK, where Margaret  
Thatcher won four elections for the Conservatives (although we did not  
have the privilege of voting for her personally as Prime Minister),  
and Tony Blair won three times for Labour. It is of course different  
from the situation in the U.S., where some sixty years ago a limit of  
two consecutive terms was introduced for the presidency.

But why is there such a fuss about this proposal in Venezuela? Once  
again, as so many times before in the last ten years, the media are  
full of stories about Chavez' dictatorial tendencies or being  
President for life, and the opposition goes on about "the principle of  
alternation ." But they know perfectly well that Chavez will only be  
re-elected in 2012 if the people vote for him in elections which have  
been certified time and again as impeccably free and honest, and that  
the possibility of mid-term recall still exists and will be  
maintained. And alternation, as the experience here in the UK and in  
so many "advanced democracies" shows, is all too often a neat device  
to prevent any real change while giving the appearance of choice with  
a superficial change of personnel.

The real problem is – and everyone knows this, they just don't want to  
discuss it – that Chavez represents the continuation of the Bolivarian  
project, a popular revolution which has transformed Venezuela and  
inspired similar transformations in several other Latin American  
countries. And that against Chavez, the opposition will again lose,  
and lose badly as they have done before.

Hugo Chavez is the people's candidate, and for the foreseeable future  
will continue to be. No, he is not a dictator, and of course he is not  
infallible. He himself has often recognised his failings. But he has  
demonstrated time and again his commitment to serving the people – the  
poor, the workers, the excluded – of Venezuela, and they have  
reaffirmed their confidence in him. If he were to go – and thank God,  
this is not the case – it is to be hoped that the people would find,  
indeed create (as they did with Chavez) another leader or leaders. But  
why substitute a leader of proven ability, indeed one who has grown in  
stature and maturity with every new stage of the revolutionary process?

In these circumstances, those who talk about "Chavismo without Chavez"  
are either naive or ill-intentioned. What is at stake in Venezuela is  
a fundamental clash of class interests, although one which is being  
played out as far as possible in peaceful and democratic fashion. The  
campaign for the Constitutional Amendment to abolish term limits is  
simply the latest battleground in this contest, and as such, a victory  
for the "Yes" camp on Sunday 15 February is crucial – and let's hope  
the victory is a decisive one! •

Diana Raby is a Research Fellow at the University of Liverpool (UK).  
Raby's book Democracy and Revolution: Latin America and Socialism  
Today was published by Pluto Press in 2006.