US and Canada Are Backing an Elite White Supremacist Minority in Venezuela
David William Pear • June 18, 2019 “Racism is one of the main engines and expressions of the current counter-revolution. In Venezuela the revolutionary struggle to end white supremacy and for self-determination is slow, and complicated by white elites, backed by US imperialism, and by the denial ofmany that racism persists.” Quote from Venezuelanalysis.com, “Racism Without Shame in the Venezuelan Counter-Revolution”
The
US and Canada are not supporting “the return of democracy” in Venezuela
as they claim. Instead, they are following in their histories of
colonialism, imperialism, exploitation, illegal wars of aggression, and
overthrowing governments. They are crushing democracy in Venezuela by
exploiting class and race warfare, being carried out by an elite white-supremacist minority against the poor, Afro-Indigenous, and other Venezuelans of color.
A white-minority has dominated commerce and politics in Venezuela since the days of slavery in the 19th century. Venezuela had slavery,
just as did the rest of the Caribbean and Latin America. Slavery went
back to the early 16th century Spanish conquistadors. More abducted
Africans were trafficked to the Caribbean and Latin America, than to the
USA.
Slavery
was officially abolished in all of the Americas in the 19th century.
The history of slavery in the Caribbean and Latin America has left a
legacy of prejudice, discrimination and class conflict, which has
largely gone unresolved.
Different
skin complexions of Latin Americans are due mostly to various mixtures
of European, Spanish and Indigenous bloodlines. The darker the skin color,
along with other ethnic features, the more there is of discrimination
in education, employment, and opportunity. Discrimination against blacks
and people of color perpetuates poverty and class conflict. In
Venezuela, as elsewhere in the Caribbean and Latin America, political
power, commerce and wealth is largely in the hands of a minority of
upper-class elites, whom are mostly whiter and lighter than those with
darker skin complexion.
One
can get a sense of how much class and race affect Latin American society
by watching Spanish language movies and soap operas. Here are just two
examples below: the setting for the TV series “The White Slave” is 19th
century Colombia; and the setting for “Teresa” is contemporary Mexico.
One
can get a sense of how much class and race affect Latin America society
by watching Spanish language movies and soap operas. The setting for
“La Esclava Blanca” is 19th century Colombia. The setting for “Teresa”
is contemporary Mexico. Photos Wikipedia.
Hugo Chavez and his successor Maduro are exuberantly despised by the elite white-supremacis
t minority. They still call Chavez negro, savage, monkey and ape.
Maduro gets the same; and the media never fails to remind the public
that he was a former bus driver, which is code for “low-class”. Maduro
is proud of his humble beginning as a bus driver and his Afro-Indigenous
ethnicity. Chavez was proud of his poor Afro-Indigenous background too,
and his final resting place is in the barrio where he and Maduro came
from.
In
1998 the elite white minority was voted out of the presidential
residence Miraflores Palace. Instead of being purged by Chavez, as an
authoritarian dictator would have done, the elites maintained their
political power base, dominance in commerce, and control of the media.
They have been trying to get back the Miraflores Palace, and indignantly
consider it their birthright. They have used every means at their
command, and even invited the US to invade the country, which would
result in thousands of deaths.
In
April 2002 the elite white minority tried a coup against Chavez, backed
and financed by the US, which failed. In December 2002 they tried a
strike by the management at the Venezuelan oil company Petróleos de
Venezuela. They tried a recall referendum against Chavez in 2004, and
lost at the polls. They tried to unify the opposition political parties
with the sole purpose of defeating Maduro in 2013, and failed. They
tried to delegitimize the 2018 presidential election by organizing a
boycott. They tried to assassinate Maduro with a drone in 2018. Their
attempts have failed.
The
white elites have sabotaged the economy, used mass demonstrations, and
organizeD violence. The self-appointed Juan Guaido declared himself the
interim president, and called for a military coup d’etat, that failed
miserably. Even with their control of the media and commerce they have
failed to oust Maduro.
The
elite upper class has millions of dollars of financial support from the
US and Canada. Some of the EU countries, following pressure from the US,
have thrown their support for the Guaido coup plotters too. The UK
froze $1.2 billion of Venezuela’s much needed reserves for life-saving
food and medicine. Spain turned its back on the people of Venezuela.
The
above political caricature of Afro-Indigenous Hugo Chavez, is titled
“Ape Commander”, an obvious racial slur. As the article Racism Without Shame in the Venezuelan Counter-Revolution from Venezuelanalysis explains:
”In Venezuela, the revolutionary struggle to end white supremacy and for self-determination is a slow slog, complicated by two forces: One, the white elites, backed by U.S. imperialism, and many of the middle class who support them, cling tenaciously to their power and privilege. Two, the denial by whites, and nearly everyone else that racism persists.”
Above
is a caricature of Nicolas Maduro as a donkey, which is a racist slur.
Animalization of black and brown people is a common theme in the white
media. Maduro is pictured as a dumb animal being driven by a white
Cuban. Ironically, one of the early achievements of the Cuban Revolution
was to pass strong antidiscrimination laws, and largely end the racial divide in Cuba.
The
US and Canada have opposed the government of Venezuela since the
election of Hugo Chavez in 1998. Chavez won the election by a landslide
on his platform of participatory democracy, local governance, frequent
elections, rewriting the constitution, social reforms, healthcare for
all, free education, adult literacy programs, and other basic economic
freedoms. He called his platform the Bolivarian Revolution, his movement
is called Chavismo, his followers are called Chavistas and they are fiercely loyal to Maduro.
Maduro is fiercely loyal to Chavez’s memory, and the Bolivarian
process. The country is renamed The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, after el libertador Simon Bolivar.
The
Bolivarian process has had dramatic success in reducing inequality,
cutting poverty in half, providing adequate housing, fighting child
malnutrition, improving public education, practically eliminating adult
illiteracy, reducing unemployment, and providing social security. (See
appendix A for economic charts of the success of the Bolivarian
Revolution, or click the link HERE.)
The US and Canada are trying to destroy the successes of the Bolivarian
process with an illegal economic blockade and violent subversion.
Before
his death, Chavez endorsed his Vice President Nicolas Maduro as his
successor. Chavez died in March of 2013, and a new election as required
by the constitution was held in April. Maduro won by a surprisingly
small margin of 1.5% against the pro-business opponent Henrique
Capriles. The opposition cried foul as they always do when they lose.
Venezuela has a voting system with both an electronic ballot and a hard copy, which Jimmy Carter called the best voting
technology in the world in 2012. In that election, which Carter
monitored, Chavez beat Capriles by a landslide, 55.1% to 44.3%. Still,
the US and the mainstream media called Chavez a dictator. Now they call
Maduro a dictator.
In
the 2018 presidential election Maduro won easily with 67.8% of the vote
against his two opponents Henri Falcón and Javier Bertucci. Maduro had
invited the United Nations to send election observers, but the UN
declined because the opposition told the UN not to come.
Why would the opposition disinvite the UN if they thought the election
was going to be rigged? Answer, because they have given up on democratic
elections. They are outnumbered by the politically awakened poor,
Afro-Indigenous, and people of color who live in the barrios.
Barrio de Caracas (Source: Wikimedia Commons)
The
US and Canada are violating international law and the UN Charter by
interfering in the internal affairs of Venezuela. The fact that
Venezuela has tremendous wealth in oil, gold, precious earth, minerals
and abundant natural and human resources is the obvious lure in whetting
their greed.
The killer economic blockade that the US and members of the Lima Group
(a US-controlled international cabal designed as a propaganda prop to
legitimate attacks on Venezuela’s government) have imposed is causing
tens of thousands of deaths, needless suffering, and is destroying
Venezuela’s economy. The Center for Economic and Policy Research
(CEPR) estimates that 40,000 Venezuelans have died as a direct result
of the economic blockade. Since the blockade is intentionally targeting
civilians, it is a violation of the Geneva Conventions, and a crime
against humanity.
The CEPR disputes the US, Canadian, and mainstream media narrative
that Nicolas Maduro is the blame for the current economic crisis. Mark
Weisbrot of CEPR says that denying that the blockade is the cause of
Venezuela’s economic crisis is like “climate change denial”.
The
US and the mainstream media blame Maduro for “wrecking” the economy.
They blame the Bolivarian process for having spent too much on social
programs for the poor, not diversifying the economy, not fighting crime,
and not putting away reserves in anticipation of low oil prices. The
problem is that it is not true. Watch the 17-minute interview of Mark
Weisbrot below:
According to a United Nation’s analysis, and 150 experts and activists,
the economic slump from falling oil prices was exacerbated by Obama’s
economic sanctions in 2015. The blockade imposed by Trump and the Lima
Group in 2017 has sent the economy into crisis. That is what economic
sanctions are intended to do, as is well-known (e.g. “make the economy scream.”).
Other
oil dependent countries in the region are struggling through the
depression in oil prices. Venezuela could have too, except for the
economic blockade, confiscation of Venezuela’s US oil company Citgo, and
the freezing of assets by the US, Canada, and the EU countries. The
constant threat of a US invasion diverts needed resources to increased
defense spending, which is another drain on the economy.
What
the US and Canada are doing to Venezuela meets the definition of
terrorism. They are using violence against civilians, starving them to
death and preventing life-saving medicine from getting through, for
political and economic purposes. It is robbery in plain sight, but many
people believe the mainstream media propaganda, rather than their own
“lying eyes”. The blindness is caused by “blockade denial”.
The
elite white minority of Venezuelans want control of the vast wealth of
Venezuela’s natural resources, and the US and Canada are helping for
their own imperial designs. It is a historical pattern. The US and
Canada have long supported dictators and opposed anti-colonial and
democratic movements in the Caribbean, Latin America, Africa and Asia.
Before the rise of the US Empire, Canada backed the British Empire
in the Caribbean, and even considered annexing its own colonies in the
West Indies. Now the UK and Canada are the US Empire’s junior imperial
partners.
After the 1898 Spanish-American war the US colonized Cuba and Puerto Rico, as well as the Philippines. The US invaded Mexico in 1914
to support the oligarchy against the nationalists. The US refused to
recognize Haiti’s government until 1862, even though it had gained
independence from France in 1804. The US militarily occupied Haiti from
1915 to 1934. During the Spanish Civil War, the US supported the fascist
dictator Franco.
Some
of the most notorious dictators that the US has backed are Batista in
Cuba, Trujillo in the Dominican Republic, Pinochet in Chile, Noriega in
Panama, and “Papa Doc” and “Baby Doc” Duvalier in Haiti. During the 1980’s the US sponsored death squads
in Central America. The US backed the French in Indochina and Africa,
the British in the Middle East and the 1982 colonial Falkland Island
War. The US backed Suharto of Indonesia in his genocidal invasion of
East Timor. The US backed apartheid South Africa, and had Nelson Mandela
on its terrorist list until 2008. Is this the picture of a country that
loves democracy and human rights?
Just
as the US overthrew a democratic government in Guatemala in 1954 for
United Fruit Company, the US is now trying to overthrow a democratic
government in Venezuela for the benefit of US oil companies, and
Canadian mining companies. And just as neocon Elliot Abrams was in
charge of the death-squads in Central America during the 1980’s, he is
now Trump’s special envoy for Venezuela. To believe that the US wants to
“restore democracy” in Venezuela takes cognitive dissonance.
The
US is supporting a cabal of elite white supremacists in Venezuelan to
push the Washington Consensus of IMF loans, privatization of state-owned
enterprises, invasion of foreign capital, Structural Adjustment
Programs (SAP) by the IMF, neoliberal debt slavery and austerity for the
poor, Afro-Indigenous, and people of color. Even Monsanto is behind the coup because Venezuela is one of the few countries that bans cancer causing Roundup and GMO seeds.
An article in the Journal of the US Army
from 2005 laid out in detail the US’s objections against the Bolivarian
process. Even when there was no question about the legitimacy of the
elections and the economy was doing great, the US was planning a coup
d‘etat. One reason is oil, and the US Army article is blunt about it:
So,
the US and Venezuela disagree on their “preference” for “this strategic
asset”. The Venezuelan people want to use their oil wealth for the
benefit of Venezuelans, and the US objects? Of course, Canada’s
“preference” is for Canadian mining companies to control Venezuela’s
gold too.
Venezuela
is a sovereign country, a member of the United Nations, and Maduro is
the internationally recognized president. (A status the US and its
vassals and allies in crime continually work to undermine). Venezuela
has the right to choose its own preferences. What the article calls
“this strategic asset” is not up for grabs. The US and Canada don’t have
a right to vote on it. The fact that the US and Canada even think that
they can dictate ownership of “this strategic asset”, shows how arrogant
and bullying they are. This is the 21st century, the Monroe Doctrine
should be dead, and the Caribbean and Latin America ain’t nobody’s
“backyard”.
The
US Army article further whines that Chavez and Maduro encouraged the
unity of South America, challenging US hegemony. Venezuela has a right
to its own foreign relations. Other invented crimes are that Venezuela
backed a stronger OPEC, and opposed the illegal Invasion of Iraq, and
the Worldwide War on Terror. Venezuela has good relations with Cuba and
Nicaragua, thus irritating the US further.
Strangely,
the US Army article finds the Bolivarian process of “participatory
democracy” rather than “representative democracy” to be nefarious? It’s
odd that the US would object to the Venezuelan people having more
democracy and local control, rather than less. Try explaining to
Chavistas how Trump became president even though he got fewer votes than
Clinton, and they will laugh in your face about “representative
democracy”.
What
is depressing is that most of the North American public is still fooled
by the US propaganda that it is motivated by democracy and human
rights. The historical evidence is to the contrary. The US is a serial
predator of illegal wars of aggression, which have killed millions of
people, and Canada has been right there side-by-side. They have invaded
at least a half-dozen countries in the past few decades, and they are
threatening a half-dozen more. The US has imposed illegal economic
sanctions on Russia, Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Venezuela. The US State
Department has bragged that the sanctions are “working” because civilians are dying. That is not concern for human rights. It is coercion, hostage taking and demands for ransom.
The
US often violates international law, reneges on treaties, ignores the
United Nations, defies the International Criminal Court, and breaks
domestic laws. It conducts illegal wars of aggression, drone
assassinations, night raids, and covert operations . The US supplies
weapons, logistics and ammunition that are used by Israel and Saudi
Arabia to kill civilians. The US supports 70% of the world’s dictators.
Does any of that fit with a country that is concerned about democracy
and human rights? The US and Canada are recklessly instigating a bloody
civil war in Venezuela.
A
State Department official named Brian Hook in a leaked memo disabused
his boss at that time, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, about the
actual aims of US foreign policy. The memo tutored Tillerson that the US
is only interested in weaponizing democracy and human rights to
destabilize adversaries. The US should treat friendly dictatorships,
such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Honduras, “different and better”,
according to Hook.
As
Hook explains, agitating countries about democracy and human rights is
destabilizing, and the US does not want to do that to friendly
dictators. With adversaries though, the US wants to destabilize them
even if they are democracies, like Venezuela. For adversaries, they are
never democratic enough to please the US. They should be destabilized
and kept off balance, according to Hook.
It
is false that US foreign policy objectives are for the benefit of the US
public. US foreign policy is for the benefit of corporations, special
interest groups and oligarchs. The beneficiaries of US foreign policy
are the elites, and they grease US foreign policy with campaign
contributions, bribes and other perks to government officials.
What
drives US foreign policy is the quest for absolute military
superiority, preservation of the US dollar as the world’s reserve
currency, maintaining the capitalist world order, controlling the
world’s natural and human resources, promoting a stable
business-friendly environment for Western transnational corporations,
and seeking opportunities for windfall profits for cronies.
In
other words, the US wants to control the whole world. If that means
overthrowing non-compliant democratically elected governments and
supporting military coups and dictators, killing millions of people,
then as far as the US is concerned, so be it. That is criminally insane.
It
is the US public that pays for US foreign policy and wars, either
through taxes or by the lack of government programs, such as universal
healthcare, education, mass transit and a “Green New Deal”. US foreign
policy does not keep the American people safer. Wars and the threat of
wars make the American people less safe.
The foreign policy elites, also called the “power elite”, which is a phrase coined by C. Wright Mills in his book The Power Elite,
are a closely knit alliance of “military, government, and corporate
officials perceived as the center of wealth and political power in the
US”. The power elite usually come from wealthy families. They all went
to Ivy League schools, they belong to the same country clubs, they are
members of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission,
and the Bilderberg group. They sit on the boards of corporations, the
media, banks, foundations, universities, and think tanks; and they
become Senators and Presidents.
The
power elite is a clique. The members all go to the same cocktail
parties, their spouses are friends, and their children go to private
schools together. Those not born into the power elite have to earn
admission by being faithful servants, and climb to the top while they
gain experience, power and influence. The power elite is the Deep State.
The Deep State makes US foreign policy and declares war; not the
American people. The American people pay, but do not get to “play”.
The Deep State, and those that serve it, such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, have no moral and legal restraints.
The Deep State, and those that serve it, such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, have no moral and legal restraints.
Humanitarian
interventionists, the right to protect (R2P), American values,
democracy and human rights are weaponized, as Hook explained to
Tillerson. It is all about US hegemony and world domination. Under three
US presidents, Bush, Obama and Trump, the US has been trying to
overthrow the government of Venezuela.
Twenty
years ago, the democratically elected president of Venezuela became a
target of the US. There was no question that the election was fair,
democratic and it was declared so by international observers, including
the Carter Center. Hugo Chavez won the presidency by a landslide. Instead of cheering for democracy at work, the US and Canada soon started plotting to overthrow the elected government.
In
2002 the US backed an unsuccessful military coup d’etat. The US
immediately endorsed the coup government, and the mainstream media
cheered. The coup failed because the people demanded a return of their
kidnapped president. Within 48 hours Hugo Chavez was back in the
Miraflores Palace.
Below
is a 15-minute documentary on the 2002 coup attempt and the US
involvement. The video features Eva Golinger. Golinger is a US attorney
who has followed events in Venezuela for decades, she was a legal
advisor to Hugo Chavez, and she has written several books. The most
well-known is The Chavez Code: Cracking US Intervention in Venezuela.
So,
how does the US square what it now says is its concern for democracy,
when the US tried to overthrow the government in 2002, regardless of it
being a democratically elected government? The US’s fallback argument is
that an adversary is never democratic enough, as Hook explained.
It
is the same answer the US gave in 1954 when it overthrew the
democratically elected president of Guatemala, Jacobo Árbenz. It is the
same answer the US gave in 1973 when it overthrew and assassinated
Chile’s democratically elected president, Salvador Allende. It is the
same answer it gave in the 1980’s when it was backing the Contras in
Nicaragua. It is the same answer the US gave when it overthrew the
democratically elected Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti in 1994, and then
overthrew him again when he was elected in 2004. It is the same answer
that the US gave when it backed the military coup in Honduras in 2009.
For the US, an adversary is never democratic enough, and it must go.
Maduro
must go because he is costing US and Canadian corporations and banks
money. He challenges the Washington Consensus. Maduro threatens US
hegemony in Latin America and the Caribbean. Those are unforgiveable
sins in the eyes of the US. It is like putting a great big bull’s eye on
your back. Being a US target has nothing to do with democracy and human
rights.
Vice
President Pence and Prime Minister Trudeau met in Ottawa at the end of
May. In their joint statement they spoke about many issues that the US
and Canada share. They chitchatted about their peaceful borders, joked
about basketball rivalry, and spared about trade. One issue that they
agreed on was Venezuela. Both said that President Nicolas Maduro must
go. When the US says “must go”, it includes assassination.
Here is what Trudeau had to say on Venezuela:
“This afternoon, the Vice President and I spoke about the concerning situation in Venezuela. Our government remains committed to the importance of finding a peaceful return to democracy and stability for Venezuelans.”
Pence followed with his statement on Venezuela:
“Canada has imposed sanctions on 113 of the dictator’s cronies. You’ve promoted the cause of freedom and a free Venezuela inside the Lima Group and the OAS. And the two of us have said, with one voice, that Nicolás Maduro is a dictator with no legitimate claim to power, and Nicolás Maduro must go.”
Restoring
democracy in Venezuela is a red herring. The US and Canadian foreign
policies are not concerned about democracy. It is lip service for the
home folks. US foreign policy has always preferred strong dictators and
puppet governments in their “back yard”. The US and Canada have
historically exploited their backyard for its natural resources,
tropical monocrops, cheap labor, and schemes to get rich. Those that
have opposed the US and Canada can be found in mass graves all over the
Caribbean and Latin American.
Trump is refreshingly crude, compared to the smooth-talking Obama. Reportedly
when Trump first took office, one of his first questions was why is the
US not at war with Venezuela, since they have all that oil and they are
right in our backyard?
International
law is meaningless to the US, and that is not new with Trump. The US
has a long history of ignoring international law. Both Secretary of
State Mike Pompeo and Trump’s national security advisor John Bolton have
a vision of the world
as the wild west, with no international law, just anarchy. It is the
cynical view that might-makes-right, and that the US is above the law.
It was the Bill Clinton administration that injected new currency into the phrases
American exceptionalism and the indispensable nation. That was the
polite way to say that the US is above the law. It is just that Trump,
Bolton, Pompeo, and Abrams do not have good manners. That is not a
policy change, it’s Trump stepping into an imperial presidency that was
left to him by Bush and Obama.
Oh,
the Trump administration still speaks out of both sides of its mouth
with platitudes that the US is a force for good in the world, and that
its values are democracy and human rights. Only fools believe that
anymore.
Appendix
Venezuelan Economic and Social Performance Under Hugo Chávez, in Graphs
1. Growth (Average Annual Percent)
Source: Banco Central de Venezuela
This graph shows overall GDP growth as well as per-capita growth in the pre-Chávez (1986-1999) era and the Chávez presidency.
From
1999-2003, the government did not control the state oil company; in
fact, it was controlled by his opponents, who used it to try to
overthrow the government, including the devastating oil strike of
2002–2003. For that reason, a better measure of economic growth under
the Chávez government would start after it got control over the state
oil company, and therefore the economy.
Above
you can see this growth both measured from 2004, and for the 1999-2012
period. We use 2004 because to start with 2003, a depressed year due to
the oil strike, would exaggerate GDP growth during this period; by 2004,
the economy had caught up with its pre-strike level of output. Growth
after the government got control of the state oil company was much
faster.
2. Public vs. Private Growth – 1999-2012 (Average Annual Percent)
Source: Banco Central de Venezuela
This graph shows the growth of the private sector versus the public sector during the Chávez years.
3. Inflation: Pre-Chávez vs. Chávez Years
Source: Banco Central de Venezuela, INEC / Inflation in Venezuela, consumer price index.
4. Unemployment Rate: Before and After Oil Strike
After
the oil strike (and the deep recession that it caused) ended in 2003,
unemployment dropped drastically, following many years of increases
before Chávez was elected. In 1999, when Chávez took office,
unemployment was 14.5 percent; for 2011 it was 7.8 percent.
5. Poverty and Extreme Poverty Rate
Source: INEC
Poverty
has decreased significantly, dropping by nearly 50 percent since the
oil strike, with extreme poverty dropping by over 70 percent.
6. Gini Coefficient, 2001-2003 – Latin America
Source: Economic Commission on Latin America and the Caribbean
The Gini coefficient, measuring income inequality, fell from 0.5 to 0.397, the lowest Gini coefficient in the region.
7. Social Spending as a Percent of GDP
Source: SISOV
Social spending doubled from 11.3 percent of GDP in 1998 to 22.8 percent of GDP in 2011.
8. Education: Net Enrollment
Source: SISOV
9. Graduates from Higher Education
Source: Ministerio del P.P. para la Educación Universitaria
10. Child Malnutrition- Age 5 and Under
Source: Instituto Nacional de Nutrición
11. Venezuelans Receiving Pensions
Source: Instituto Venezuela de los Seguros Sociales
The number of Venezuelans receiving pensions has increased from less than 500,000 in 1999 to nearly 2 million in 2011.
David William Pear
is a columnist writing on U.S. foreign policy, economic and political
issues, human rights and social issues. David is a Senior Contributing
Editor of The Greanville Post (TGP) and a prior Senior Editor for
OpEdNews (OEN). David has been writing for The Real News Network (TRNN)
and other publications for over 10 years. David is a member of Veterans
for Peace, Saint Pete (Florida) for Peace, CodePink, and the
Palestinian-led non-violent organization International Solidarity
Movement.
(Republished from The Greanville Post by permission of author or representative)
No comments:
Post a Comment