Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky gorojovsky at
Sun Jan 30 19:37:36 MST 2000

En relación a Bolivarismo,
el 30 Jan 00, a las 11:19, Larry Rohter del New York Times dijo:

> QUITO, Ecuador, Jan. 29 -- In presidential palaces and defense
> ministries all across Latin America this week, the same question was
> being nervously asked in the wake of the military coup here that
> toppled President Jamil Mahuad: can it happen again somewhere else?

What is really important here, however, is not what do the palaces
and ministries worry about, but the spark of hope that the masses may
be beginning to feel at hearing these news.

The comment by "La Nación" quoted by our journalist of the NYT is
twice as important, particularly because this papes is by no means a
_leading_  newspaper (in this, he is wrong), but because _La Nación_
is the captain's logbook of Argentinian oligarchs. Their feeling that
something is wrong with the scheme imposed after 1976 has a lot to do
with the fact that this social class is the only one with a für sich
consciousness in our country, and it is quite older than American
imperialism and the IMF.

> "The political leadership of the continent should not be sleeping too
> heavy a sleep today," Argentina's leading newspaper, La Nación, warned
> in an editorial titled "The Ecuadorean Mirror." "Something is
> happening in Ecuador and in other countries of Latin America, and the
> forecast is not for an easy passage."
> Coming after the recent rise to power of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, the
> coup here indicates that groups of military officers all over Latin
> America are coming under the spell of an old ideology that is being
> dressed up in new clothes. Mr. Chávez calls it "Bolivarismo," after
> the 19th-century liberator Simón Bolívar, and posits a system in which
> the armed forces bypass traditional political parties seen as corrupt
> and ally themselves directly with the masses.

Where the NYT has it wrong is here:

> During the cold war, in contrast, the armies of Latin America
> enthusiastically embraced the anti-Communist "doctrine of national
> security," originally developed by American policy makers, as
> justification for their repeated intervention in the political
> process. The result was right-wing military dictatorships in Central
> America and countries like Argentina, Brazil and Chile and many abuses
> of human rights.

The Armed Forces have never been monolithic on these issues. The
dictatorships that the NYT refers to were the results of political
cleansing of these Armed Forces, many times tarnished with human
blood. The "Bolivarian" ideas are the new version of the very old
struggle within our Armed Forces between the popular and the colonial
elements. This struggle, by the way, is the expression of the
weakness of our ruling classes, of their historical cowardice, and of
the terrible fate that imperialism begins to show as our only way
forward, the military included. So that it is just a new version of
what generated Peronism, Varguism and so on.

This is why what follows lacks any sense but that of the shameful
betrayal to their own countrypeople by current "progressive"
politicians. It is a slander to bracket the Bolivarian military with
the pro-imperialist military:

> Not surprisingly, the loudest complaints about the coup here have come
> from countries that survived the cold war experience and do not want a
> repetition. "It is not tolerable that when governments face difficult
> situations or economic crises, all it should take to generate a
> situation of instability is an uprising by a group of colonels," the
> foreign minister of Chile, Juan Gabriel Valdés, said.

It is not that

> ...the passage of time, combined with the political squabbling and
> economic hardship that have accompanied the restoration of democratic
> rule, have softened some of the bitter memories of repressive military
> rule. "Governments haven't produced results, politically or
> economically, and people are fed up and looking for an alternative
> that is functional and coherent," said Michael Shifter, a senior
> policy analyst at the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington.

On the contrary, governments have produced results, the results that
they were expected to produce. While years ago it was the military
who produced the same results, it is civilian sepoys today who are in
the lead. The fact that military now want to produce OTHER results
has no meaning for the NYT journalist, which is quite relieving.

As I am fond of quoting the _Martín Fierro_, I will just add this
verse to what follows, as if putting a title to the paragraphs below:

El tiempo solo es tardanza de lo que está por venir

> A poll taken here just before the coup, for instance, found that the
> military in Ecuador has reached a level of popularity even higher than
> the Roman Catholic Church.

And what follows is the reason why:

> Even before last week's coup, diplomats here and in Colombia were
> acknowledging the existence of a "Chavista" faction within the
> military. Indeed, one of the colonels who was involved in the seizure
> of Congress here on Jan. 21 cited Mr. Chávez's pan-American ideals in
> a letter he made public after he sought political asylum in the
> Venezuelan Consulate in Guayaquil.

So that we are having the horsemen of Bolívar crossing the Continent

> "I saw 25,000 Indians asking for their rights, and I saw military
> units supporting them," Mr. Chávez, who was elected to office in
> December 1998 after a prison term, said approvingly. "Who are we to
> judge the people of Ecuador?" he asked, adding that, "We cannot
> condemn people when they take to the streets."

OK, the NYT has declared war on Chavez. He is on the best track! One,
ten, a hundred Venezuelas!

Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at

More information about the Marxism mailing list