•Thev say that. Venezuela is a rich countrv, they fill our mouths with the mythology of riches and progress. In reality we are a country of the poor, the wretched and the sick. Exploitation and plunder have gone to inconceivable lengths, Venezuela is in the hands of the big foreign monopolies and of a few families who act as stooges for these monopolies. Our entire economy ensures the grave disability of dependence and every day our people suffer more from economic and social extortion and violence.
"Every day the poor get poorer. Every day the monopolies get richer. Where does the sweat of your forehead go? Who are you working for? Why are you so poor in such a rich country? Why do you poor out your blood and your life, and those of your children and grandchildren? Why is there no education and culture for you? Why are there no more hospitals, no sanatoriums, no convalescent homes? Why will vour old age be a time of Insecurity and waiting for death? thy is your youth a time of bitterness and frustration? Why do you not have the right to be a Man, free, self-respecting, full of opportunity?
"Because we are a country in the grip of the big monopolies and of a small group of multimillionaires. Because we are a country which is dependent, humiliated, insulted and plundered." Editorial Letter to the Reader, Vea Y Lea, April 20, 1971.
By Latin American standards, and to the exclusive benefit of the explaiting classes, Venezuela is a rich country. Like most other Latin American countries, it is heavily dependent on one product, and oil accounts for 93% of its exports. But world oil prices, unlike the prices of other commodities, have been steadily rising in recent years. As a result the economic crisis in Venezuela has been less acute than that in other Latin American countries. Nevertheless the growth rate has slowed down and the rate of capital formation is almost stagnant. Between 1968 and 1969 the level of exports actually declined by 0.2% and capital outflows have been higher than from most other Latin American countries put together.
The oil Industry employs less than 1% of the active population. But oil revenues have produced a relatively large parasitic middle class and bureaucracy and swollen service industries. Today in Caracas all the visible signs of the American way of life are present but the superficial characteristics of prosperity hid a tremendous poverty.
300,000 people live miserable existences in packing cases and tin boxes on the hills that surround the capital. Many of these so-called "marginal" people are immigrants from majority of the population lives in the cities. The origins of this immigration are not to be found in urban industrialisation but in the failure to conduct agrarian reform and to invest in farming. Indeed, many of the people attracted to the cities still maintain a semi-peasant existence whilst Increasing the great numbers of unemployed. Change has brought about a social disintegration such that as many as 51% of children born in Venezuela today have no knowledge of their father.
The present struggle against the Christian Democratic regime of Caldera is a continuation of the movement that overthrew the dictator Perez Jimenez In 1958. This popular revolt resulted in the reign of Betancourt and his Accion Democratica party, It was during Betancourt's rule that the guerrilla struggle began as the reactionary nature of his government became clearer. Under the influence of the Cuban Revolution pressure for change grew and demonstra tions were met with savage repression. Accion Democratica split and the MIR (Mowimento de Izquierda Revolucionariat was formed and set up guerrilla fronts in the East of Venezuela. The Communist Party had supported Betancourt but eventually it too developed a position -albeit temporarilyof support for the armed struggle. By 1962 guerrilla warfare was under way. Remnants of the Patriotic Junta that had overthrown Jimenez, Douglas Bravo and Luben Petkoff of the Communist Party, and elemants of the MIR engaged in a struggle which was soon to lead to the formation of the FALN (Fuerzas Armadas de Liberacion| and the FLN (Frente de Liberacion Nacional). At this stage the Communist Party was in favour of the armed struggle, although its support can be explained partly by its fear of being outstripped by the MIR in this respect. Later it was to adopt a position of complete hostility. At the OLAS conference in 1967 it was publicly condemned by Castro for its treachery.
In 1965 Douglas Bravo broke with the Party. In 1966 Fabricio Ojeda, largely responsible for the Patriotic Junta that had overthrown Jimenez and chief of the FLN, was assassinated whilst on a visit to Caracas to discuss for a last time with the Communist Party. Douglas Bravo took over the leadership of both organisations. By 1967 the Communist Party's degeneration was completed, symbolised by the telegram of condolence they sent to the family of Dr. Julio Ibarren Borges, who was kidnapped and executed in reprisal for revolutionary leaders murdered by the government, The guerrilla fronts have continued their activities in the face of active opposition from the PCV, who traded the release of their members from prison and freedom to participate in elections as the price of their defection. They claimed that in 1962 a revolutionary situation had existed; but in the ensuing years it is difficult to see what has changed beyond increased repression and the PCV defection.
Inevitably, the process of decay has continued. Venezuela has not known a Manist party or indeed a Maoist faction of any dimension, The form of the latost split which took place at the end of 1970 has been the formation of of the MAS (Movimiento al Socialismo) with Teodoro Petkoff as one of its leaders. Petkoff originally supported the armed struggle (along with his brother Luben! but then condemned it whilst in the PCV. Now the MAS has taken a position, not of armed struggle, but as a more liberal variant of the PCV. The MAS has positive aspects. It opposes the invasion of Czechoblovakia; it claims to oppose the "theory"
of stages. Above all it is a reaction against the party machine, the lack of internal democracy, the dominance of Moscow the magazine, explains, "the differences [between Accion Democratica and the Christian Democrats] are superficial, since in the background the hidden threads of the same oligarchic and pro-imperialist Interes's continue to operate. The difference is one of "style", While Copei (Christian Democrats) and AD (Accion Democratical polemicise on the respective merits of Pacification and Repression, in fact the two parties are reinforcing their collsboration to suppress the masses and the repression itsulf is in full and vigorous expansion, The difference in style produces apparent anomalies, It means that a magazine such as Ves y Lea, which reports interviews with Douglas Bravo and has a big Trotskyist influenos can exist and is on sale at most street kiosks; and meetings can be held at which calls for the armed struggle can be made. But those who participate in such activities live in a state of pernanent insecurity, liable to arbitrary arrest at any moment and with the threat of death and imprisonment constantly with them, such that some of them fael that they would be personally more secure if they were up in the mountains with the guerrillas.
On May Day your correspondents participated in a counter-demonstration to the treditional govermentpatronised festivities. Afterwards a march of 200 set off, led by a benner bearing a portrait of Che, with no clear purpose, but merely, it seems, to avoid straggling off to their houses. After about a mile they passed a house in which there was ar Inspector of the Metropolitan Police. He came out shooting. He killed a 22-year-old worker, Benjamin de Jesus Teran Ruis, with a bullet in the head. And he wounded severa: other people. This Inspector was reported to have been taken for questioning and then returned to duty. The next day, after attempts by the authorities to have the burial immediately in order to prevent demonstrations, 60 people were arrested at the funeral and in the cemetery. All this made little impact on the Caracas newspapers.
Trade unions in Venezuela are held in the grip of the bourgeois and reformist parties. The largest union, the CTV is controlled by AD, Copei and MEP, a leftish split from AD. Workers regard it as in no sense a class organisation. Its leaders negotiate directly with the government, without regard to the membership's wishes. The official May Day rally is addressed by Caldera from the balcony of the presidential palace. The CUTV is the PCV's union and is barely more militant; it is also weaker, Most Venezuelan unions are organised along political lines with only a few independent Industrial or factory unions. As an article by Dullo Bracho in Vea y Lea says: "Most struggles are begun from below, obliging the leadership to put themselves at the head of them and subsequently creating a contradiction between the masses, who press for concrete objectives, and the leaders, who at the same time as they pervert the basic Issues of the struggle apply a policy of class-collaboration.
There are symptoms which demonstrate non-participation i the unions. 90% of the union leaderships are elected with the participation of less than 40% of the trada union mem bers. The discussion of contracts takes place with a minimum of participation on the part of the workers. In the more advanced sectors workers are beginning to look for their own organisational forms, doing without the traditional union leadership".
It is generally recognised that the revolutionary left in Venezuela is weak and divided. The big revolutionary upsurge which led to the overthrow of Perez Jimenez and was carried on into resistance against the betrayals and police terror of Betancourt and the AD party petered out as the
vacillated and degenerated. The armed revolutionary organisations broke with their degenerated parties: first the FLN/FALN broke with the CP: later the MIR guerrilla fronts broke with the MIR and set themselves up independently as Bandera Roia (Red Flag) and the Organizacion de los Revolucionarios (OR -Organisation of the Revolu tionaries). But they suffered badly from their isolation. The FLN/FALN lost most of its urban organisation and support through desertion and betrayal, and all of the groups lost many of their guerrilla fighters from the mountains and countryside. Many of the best leaders and fighters were killed, and many are in prison. They still suffer from this isolation. Because of the severity of the repression and their absolute need to protect their cadres through strict clandestinity, their activities are very little known even to active revolutionary militants in the universities and towns, Even their literature is very hard to obtain inside Venezuela; its existence is indeed unknown to some militants. Their influence, in spite of the fact that, in the abstract, they are greatly admired by revolutionaries, is therefore quite small in direct political terms inside Venezuela. Their great and Important achievement is that they have maintained the tradition and the continuity of the armed struggle in Venezuela. Above all, they have not abandoned the struggle. As Douglas Bravo says, in a message to the Cabimas Congress (see below): "The war has begun, the revolution is on the march, and the obstacles which it has encountered cannot lead us to defeatist positions. We cannot confuse the failure of the rightist leaderships of the parties which were once called revolutionary, who capitulated, with the failure of the revolution as a whole. The war is prolonged, and is part of the process we are living through..
These organisations may also provide a pole around which new forms of armed struggle will be organised. In recognition of their isolation, the three main armed organisations (the FLN/FALN, Bandera Roja and the OR) are markedly changing their political line. All of them clearly accept the need for mass work in addition to the organisation and extension of the armed struggle. To a greater or lesser extent, they also accept the need for the creation of a revolutionary party, Banders Roja, for example, are attemptIng to link the armed struggle more closely with the activities and immediate demands of the people; they reject the concept of merely terrorist activity, and have used their armed strength to support the struggles of workers in their factories against the employers" increasing use of the repres sive force of the State. The OR, which was badly affected by betrayals, is reorganising itself and developing its political line, notably in favour of the building of a mass revolutionary perty.
Much the most developed theoretically of the three organisations is Douglas Bravo's FLN/FALN. The FLN/ FALN have been accused of foquisma. But they maintain. that they never in fact held this position, If for a time their activities have been largely restricted to the rural guerrilla front, this hes been from necessity. Their ability to maintain their forces in the mountains for 10 years, cut off from the support of the CP, even physically betrayed by this party, is an extraordinary achievement, It is an achievement that was only possible because they had the support of the peasants. They have now, they say, reached a stage where they can begin to extend their activities towards the centre; first into more populated areas, then into what they describe as "suburban" areas and minor industrial areas, and finally into the towns. Like Bandera Roja, they see the need to link the armed struggle not only to the abstract goal of socialism, but also to the falt needs of the masses Thus, for example, in their rural sphere of activities, they have ambushed lorries with the help of local pousents, and distributed the contents of the lorries among the peasants. Above all, the FLN/FALN have reached the clear position that they cannot extend the struggle beyond their rural guerrilla front unless they succeed in creating a mass revolutionary party.
On more general theoretical questions, their position is equally clear, They reject the Stalinist concept of the national bourgonis revolution and state clearly that their aim is to achieve the proletarian revolution and the over throw of imperialism and capitalism; they reject also any concept of building socialism in one country, and hold a strongly internationalist cosition. especially as regards the rest of Latin America and Cuba in particular. (Douglas Bravo's supposed "denunciation" of Cuban "betrayal" was, Incidentally, an invention of the bourgeois imperialist press; the FLN/FALN are critical of aspects of the Cuban revolu tion, notably of its support for the Peruvian military regime, but hold that any criticisms should be made in a fraternal and comradely spirit and in the context of general support for the achievements and heroism of the Cuban people.)
Douglas Bravo states that in Venezuela the party exists and that it is the Partido de in Revolucion (Party of the Revolution!, most of whose members and leaders are also members of the FLN/FALN, but which has its own internal organisation and leading bodies. This party is being developed, But the leaders of the FLN/FALN and of the Partido de la Revolucior are clearly aware of the need to draw on new forces and to work for unity among the scattered International in Venezuela. lutionary movements that are at all full or ac squate, let alone objective, and that attacks and agitates against the repressive violence of the Caldera regime. It has been in existence for about 18 months and has become progressively more political and more radical. As this process has taken place, Ves y Lea has lost its advertising income, but. not its circulation, and the people who work for it have become increasingly subject to police harassment. It is therefore hot clear how long it will be able to survive as an openly revolutionary magazine. But for the moment it is important and influential, and is used by revolutionary organisations, not only of course by Trotskyists, to propagate their ideas and to denounce the repressive activities of the government.
In general, there are signs in Venezuela that revolutionary activity is on the upturn, after a low period of disunity and demoralisation. The moves towards unity and the creation of a new revolutionary vanguard are a sign of this, Workers are increasingly coming into conflict with the bureaucratised political leaderships of their unions and hence with the AD/Copei control of the state; in this process, the reformist nature of the CP leadership is also being exposed. Strikes are declared illegal by the government and are subject to military and police intervention. The peasants' struggles for land and for better conditions are confronted with the repression of the Guardia Nacional. The Indian population is trying to re occupy the land stolen from it by the latifundistas and is meeting with persecution and attempted extermination by the Cazadores, the special elite anti- insurgency forces trained in brutality in Panama. The barrios, the city slums, are invaded by the repressive forces. The students have been in more or less permanent revolt since the government attempted to introduce a Law ending the autonomy of the universities and their immunity from police on military intervention, in earlier student struggles. The national univarsity in Caracas has been closed for six months because the government is unable to control the students and administer the university with teachers and administration able or willing to operate its Law. The rebellion has spread to the secondary schools, which the government is similarly unable to dare to keep open, with the result that formal education in Venezuela is virtually non-functioning. The open and violent revolt of the students is even more important in Latin America than in Europe or the United States, since the students tend to retain their links with the people, and since the universities, in conditions of dictator. ship, have frequently been the only places in which revolutionary traditions can be openly upheld. As Douglas Bravo explained in his message to the Cabimas Congress, "There is thus no demand put forward by the masses, however small, which does not find itself confronted with the repressive brutality of the Copei government... The oppressed classes in their struggle against exploitation continually clash with the military forces and the police; in face of this reactionary violence there is no other alternative than revolutionary violence."
Revolutionaries in Venezuela are nevertheless aware that the struggle will be long and bitter. There appear to be few iflusions about a quick victory of the toquista type, or a repetition of the Cuban experience. The imperialist forces are now very much more organised than they were. In addi. tion. Venezuela, because of its oil, is of exceptional strategic Importance to imperialism. Venezuelans say that the Vanezuelan army is probably the best trained and equipped, and the most experienced in anti-guerrilla activity, of all Latin American armies. The grip of reformism on the masses is said to be exceptionally strong, with a union bureaucracy integrated into the state and a rich propaganda machine, Loss still are there any illusions, except no doubt among opportunists of the CP variety, on the possibility of any repetition of the Chilean phenomenon in Venezuela. The MEP is talking in terms of a popular unity-type electoral front with the CP. MAS, etc, But its leaders are aware that its chances of electoral success are less than in Chile because of the solidity of the AD/Copei pro-imperialist collaboration, and above all that its chances of being permitted to govern are minimal, because of the strength and political traditions of the Venezuelan army, their objectives, it seerns, are largely education, and they are also attempting to create popular committees. Their effect, nevertheless, is likely to be the traditional effect of reformist parties: creating a certain confusion among the people.
The real prospect is of a progressive extension and broadening of the current dispersed forms of armed struggle and confrontation with the repressive forcas, into a popular war against imperialism and its local representatives and for the proletarian revolution. The Political Declaration of the Cabimas Congress stated: "The socialist revolution, as the only valid alternative for Latin American and national liberation, means the reaffirmation of popular revolutionary violence as the only certain way to liberate ourselves and to succeed in building the future socialist society. The armed struggle not only has the strategic characteristic of the unavoidable path and denouement of the socialist revolution; it also has existed and exists today as a genuine process, in which its tactical, practical and concrete character is continuously confirmed, in opposition to the behaviour of