But just because the U.S. is up to its old imperial tricks doesn't mean that leftists, anti-interventionists, and peace loving folks should blind themselves to realities on the ground in Venezuela. The testimony of the smarter investigative media and too many Venezuelans is loud and summed up well by Joshua Alvarez :
Maduro claimed to have "won" the presidency in an election in May 2018 withNicolas Maduro’s reign of power in Venezuela is illegitimate. Not only was his latest election to the presidency stolen, he’s presiding over a failed state that is harming its own citizens and causing South America’s own gigantic refugee crisis.
I could see Trump emulating that one.68 percent of the vote despite having an approval rating of just 21 percent.
Deceased president Hugo Chavez legitimately won the support of many of of the poorest Venezuelans by sharing some the country's oil wealth with inmates of Caracas' slums. The U.S. and our oil companies hated him, but he was a smart left populist who knew how to play on nation pride. He may not have built a sustainable economy and polity, but a good-size section of the people believed he was trying against subversion from a bourgeoisie abetted by the Yankees. The opposition was split by its own rivalries and never convinced Venezuelans that it was out for the nation instead of the U.S. and its own class interests. Maduro, Chavez' designated successor, has been unable to either pick up his mantle or run the country effectively. Venezuelans are getting out if they can.
So what does all this mean for leftists in San Francisco? Friday's little rally should have been at the very least a defensible moral statement against U.S. imperial actions.
Instead, the speakers I heard (briefly) were simply idiotic. We can't allow ourselves to be trapped in a tired template that defaults to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." We wouldn't support ordinary Venezuelans by supporting Trump administration "diplomacy"; that's easy. But Maduro's rule is not something that decent progressives can applaud either. (And certainly we get nothing by using a rally against intervention in Venezuela to rail against the faults of the Obama administration or Democrats in general. Focus, folks!)
The collective efforts of Latin American countries, which are already bearing the brunt of the refugee crisis, offer the best hope for a less violent, more popular resolution for a people who've lived dashed hopes and gross impoverishment. There may be no good outcome in sight, but sure as ever it won't come because North Americans make fools of themselves about other peoples' struggles.
Good rant.
ReplyDeleteI'm not the biggest fan of Ben Norton's, but is it really about the oil, as he writes?
ReplyDelete"I am completely neutral among candidates at this stage -- excluding only Tulsi Gabbard who seems a putrid opportunist."
ReplyDeleteLikewise, I'm not the biggest fan of Tulsi Gabbard, but at least she's speaking out against U.S. involvement in Venezuela. (And Bernie.) Unlike the others.
Brandon -- sorry for not answering you about Tulsi Gabbard. My low opinion of her was something I shared with Marianna. We thought her a self-promoting phony, far too ready to rush to whatever corner served her interests. These days she's selling herself as having evolved out of a homophobic past. Lots of politicians change their views, but few were actual activists against LGBT rights as she was. In matters foreign, there's such a thing as being so open-minded as to be vacuous -- which is what I'd call meeting up (while in no official position of power) with Bashar al-Assad after he began killing his own democracy activists.
ReplyDeleteGlad she's being vocal about Venezuela. Will be something of a test whether Dems know enough to dodge that hot potato of neo-con interest.
And, yes, US behavior toward Venezuela largely comes back to oil.
And I'm sorry if I asked repeatedly. I don't think Tulsi's necessarily "putrid" but she does change with the wind, as Marianna might say. For me, what exemplifies her style is this: After she won the Democratic primary in 2012 when she was running for Congress in 2012, she had her Hilo headquarters closed soon afterwards. She still faced a Republican opponent, David "Kawika" Crowley, whom she didn't bother to debate. But she had it in the bag, winning over 80% of the vote.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I know Kai Kahele a little. He's running against Tulsi for the 2d District House seat, as mentioned in this article about her campaign turmoil. He's slightly older than I am, and he was going steady with my classmate when we were seniors (he went to a different high school).
ReplyDelete