Venezuela: UNT leader argues against PSUV

Response to the companeros of FUTEZ-CCURA (State of Zulia):
“Let's defend free and democratic debate in the ranks of workers on the issues of constitutional reform and the PSUV.”


I've read the document which you published in which you state your 'support in the fundamentals to the proposal of Constitutional Reform which President Chavez has presented' and also your support "to the creation of the PSUV as the unified organization of revolutionary militants.”

Independently of how we evaluate these important subjects, I wish to congratulate you as these statements show positively you have gone beyond the framework of economism, labor demands, and apoliticism which in many occasions we have fallen into...

In your declaration you expressed without any ambiguity “your political differences with the declarations made by Orlando Chirino, principal leader of the CCURA on a national level, who has stated he does not support constitutional reform nor the formation of the PSUV. Instead he advocates a constituent assembly.”

You state that these 'positions were not debated within the CCURA and as far as we know no leader of CCURA in Zulia supports them' You end up saying you "are not involved in the debates between Trotskyists and Leninists but are carrying out in Venezuela expressed in the debates between the FBT and the CCURA...'

CCURA is an example of workers democracy. First, your criticisms have given me happiness as we are showing to the workers of Venezuela that our current is totally different from the others in that we have democracy in our ranks and there exists a real opportunity for all companeros to queston freely and without fear political and trade union positions...

I feel proud to belong to C-CURA because we dont shut up people because of "buddies" nor do we carry out disciplinary tribunals to punish the opposition. Nor de we put down any companero accusing them of being "shady or counter-revolutionary."

The way you have edited my remarks leads to confusion. It would seem Orlando Chirino is not interested in a crucial national debate or he wants to maintain the existing Constitution or that he is opposed to building the PSUV.

From the day the existing Constitution was signed I declared it was a bourgeois constitution,...and for that reason the workers and mobilized people should continue to battle to get radical changes and not simply reforms and political retouching.

Recognized as such, the Constitution contained extraordinary political democratic and social conquests in spite of being a reflection of bourgeois society, that I would offer my life to defend it if the reactionary forces, internally or externally, wished to overturn the conquests of that Constitution.

We have to say the proposal presented by the Executive Branch does some more retouching but there is nothing within a socialist perspective. That is, it does not question at all capitalist property. The fruit of our labor and our surplus value that we produce as workers will be appropriated by the businessmen minority and under the best of conditions by a State that administers the means of production from the point of view of capitalism. The real exercise of power is not transferred to the mobilized people so that they can make basic decisions to transform the country.

The possibility is now open that the multi-nationals will have legal rights over the soil, marine areas and our natural resources through mixed corporations. Bourgeois justice remains intact, the administration of which remains in the hands of the capitalists and will continue favoring the exploiters and the thieves in white shirts. The defense of the revolution will continue to be in the hand of a professional army and not the armed people trained to defend themselves against the enemies of the people and revolution. In reference to re-election, it violates our rights as only the President can be re-elected.

It is such that the bourgeois structures are left intact that even the head of FEDECAMERAS (Employer Federation) has thanked vice-president of the Republic, Jorge Rodriguez, for committing to respect private property of the means of production. This shows us that the constitutional reform has as its fundamental basis conciliating the interests of exploiters with the exploited. We all know this is utopian as it is not possible to conciliate opposed interests....

There are some issues that are vital for workers such as the establishment of a Fund for Social Stability which protects workers who have been excluded for being unemployed or not having a fixed job in a company, as well as the reduction of the work day to 6 hours, a historic wish of workers throughout the world.

But I wish to express my doubts about two aspects in the proposal, as the Fund for Social Stability can be legitimizing the exclusion of millions of our compatriots who do not have a decent job and will now have the benefit of a subsidy when the State and Constitution guarantee full employment for all Venezuelans. Also about the 6 hours, the content of the proposal does not clarify whether the reduction in hours will not mean a reduction in pay or an increase in the level of exploitation....

Pardon my fear, but 40 years in the battle to defend the rights of workers has shown me to be extremely distrustful of laws and decrees that are open to interpretation because they always end up hurting workers.

That is why I have called for the necessity that all people and especially the workers to discuss the contents of the MAGNA CARTA through mechanisms more democratic and superior to what is being called "Parliamentarism of the Street", as we all know the limitations of this option. To overcome this limitation I propose that all debate and approval of the reform be through a new Peoples Assembly ...with delegates of workers, peasants, communities, students, members of the Armed Forces which would be superior to a Constituent Assembly which is based on "one person one vote." With a Peoples Assembly with this characteristics, that is fully democratic and representative of the fundamental social sectors of the revolutionary process...

On The PSUV:

I am glad to know that the companeros in Zulia State that signed the document, at last, after many years, understand the importance that the workers and people be organized politically in a Party...The construction of a revolutionary party of the workers and the people should be a theme that crosses all the political debates in the country because up to now humanity has not designed an instrument that is more efficient and effective than a political party to organize to defend their ideas and try for political power, which is the essence of the Party.

For four decades of my life I have fought for the workers to organize politically, independently of the exploiters and oppressors, that is why I am surprised that you say I am opposed to the building of the PSUV. What I have outlined publicly are the reasons that have led me to the decision to not linking myself with that organization....

C-CURA had an important discussion at the beginning of the year and took the resolution that we would commit ourselves to building a revolutionary party and we were in favor of workers participating in that debate. Just as we expressed our interest, we also presented some criteria in doing that, such as the right to not dissolve ourselves as a current and that we would be able to participate as an organized fraction to defend our positions. We stated categorically that the party should not be contaminated with the presence of capitalists, large landowners, bureaucrats, or those who are corrupt. We demanded a program which would completely break with capitalism and imperialism and genuinely advance to socialism....

Unfortunately, some did not listen to our concerns and with the passage of time we saw the proposal to ban currents within the PSUV was ratified and a process of hurried construction was begun by the leadership of the old parties of the supporters of Chavez. Many who have signed up and play a leading role in the control of the beginning organization are well known personalities from the capitalist camp; from the old parties AD and COPEI. Many have shown to be bureaucrats and corrupt. Others are an expression of the "Bolibourgeoise" and there are not a few who were involved in assisting the coup in April 2002 against President Chavez and the revolutionary process.

On the other hand, a systematic campaign of accusations was begun against those who would not link to the organization and what is worse, a major political offensive was started by the Government and the Ministry of Labor to reject the autonomy of labor organizations, violating the rights of collective bargaining, to the destruction of the Natonal Union of Workers, which is a conquest of Venezuelan workers which we are obliged to defend.

It is evident that the situation evolved rapidly, with the result that the political proposal in which many workers had based their hopes had become distorted to such a point that many activists and militants, among them myself, have reached the conclusion that the leadership and the program underlies the PSUV are not in the interest of the working class.

It's no secret that there is an inter-bureaucratic dispute for the control of the PSUV. The programmatic discussion has been relegated to a secondary level and today those who wish to join are obliged to defend a constitutional reform that they have no had a chance to discuss, and in my opinion, is directed toward a Capitalist State and the political regime of the democratic bourgeosie. President Chavez and the Convoking Committee are conscious of this, with the result that they have led to act in a vertical fashion leading, without having constituted the PSUV as such, without having adopted statutes and disciplinary rules, the "Unipersonal Disciplinary Committee" has been named to judge and condemn the political "commentaries" of one who initiated that party...

We do not want to let pass that President Chavez about 3 weeks ago said he would be happy if the PSUV was reduced in size to two million members, without mentioning what would happen to the other four million Venezuelans who have joined, What is of concern is that according to the Convoking Committee only 16% of the members are participating in meetings.

You begin with something that is true: CCURA has no discussed or approved what position to take in regard to the reform, nor have we evaluated the evolution of the construction of the PSUV. I am completely conscious of this and in all the interviews I have given and interventions at workers meetings, I have always made the effort to clarify that they were my personal opinions...

I believe you are mistaken if you assume CCURA is a political party that operates on the basis of democratic centralism. I want to clarify that CCURA is a collective in which various different currents come together, militants of different political parties and independents...

I agree with you that it is not necessary to refer permanently to to specific socialist theoreticians. You know me pretty well and you know that it is not my style to quote Marx, Lenin, Trotsky or other revolutionary figures to validate my positions...

But you cannot erase that the revolution is under threat day after day... For me it is not a "theoretical abstraction" the defense of trade union autonomy, nor the right to collective bargaining. Perhaps for you it is a "theoretical abstraction" that capitalist private property exists as the basis of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic, but for me and others, it is not.

To combat traitors does not mean isolating oneself from the people. It does mean we need to be coherent with our form of thought and and be firm with the program of socialist revolution that we defend....

Lets' have a democratic debate in our ranks...

Orlando Chirino publication date Sept. 17, 2007

(translated and edited by Earl Gilman)

Tue 02, October 2007 @ 12:46