Under the eyes of Chavismo, Venezuela continues to win

Observe, listen and analyze. Understanding Venezuela demands all of our senses. We must also carry out an analysis based on the history of social and popular struggles that shaped its political process. From the perspective of Chavismo, President Maduro’s victory and inauguration, supported by popular power, opens up the limits of understanding popular struggles in Latin America based on the crisis of the ideological concept of liberal democracy.

In Brazil, the first debate that must be overcome is that of international interference in the political and institutional reality of Venezuelan democracy. A dangerous discourse in a world collapsed by an international security crisis, wars and a hegemonic transition. Progressive forces in Latin America must position themselves against policies of international interference and this is far from being a concept of 21st century socialism, but rather in accordance with the principles of international law, in which it is essential to reaffirm respect for the sovereignty of States, as foreseen in the Charter of the United Nations, and the principle of non-intervention as a fundamental pillar of contemporary international relations.

Several right-wing politicians, presidents and former presidents, such as Álvaro Uribe and Iván Duque, have claimed in recent days to defend the intervention. The escalation of these international destabilizations puts the sovereignty of the entire continent at risk. Venezuela cannot be transformed into a terrain of geopolitical dispute or a new international conflict, under the pretext of “democratic restoration” or “defense of human rights”. The current hegemonic transition intensifies disputes between global powers, and often instrumentalizes peripheral countries to project power and influence regional dynamics. Therefore, Venezuela, as a sovereign State, must be defended against interference policies that compromise its political, social and economic stability.

Another important principle to be claimed is that of the self-determination of peoples — a principle of International Law — which seeks to ensure the independence, freedom and right of people to organize themselves. Therefore, domestic processes must be respected. Venezuelan democracy cannot be analyzed based on liberal concepts, as Venezuela has the right to self-determination and sovereignty over its processes and institutions. It is a non-liberal, socialist democratic model, supported by its constitution and numerous consultative, communal, communicative and politicization processes.

Venezuelan democracy, with all its contradictions and challenges, remains victorious. The formula for success lies in the protagonist power of the people, rooted and strengthened by internal popular relations, legitimized by Hugo Chávez’s 1999 constitution and structured by the organization of communal power. The protagonism of the Venezuelan people is constituted by politicization and organization around the communes, this is Venezuelan popular power.

Communes, as a concrete expression of popular power, advance in the democratization of popular participation and more recently of the budget, having access to resources giving strength to an economic alternative based on self-sufficiency and cooperation. This popular organization is fundamental to overcoming “dependent capitalism” and creating a material and social basis for socialism.

Communication and popular politics are other central social tools to face the challenges posed by the media blockade and attempts to isolate Venezuela internationally. It is impressive to move between two universes: on the international stage, President Maduro is portrayed as a pariah and undemocratic, but, when stepping on Venezuelan soil, in the domestic political context, he is a popular leader with great communication and mobilization skills for the Venezuelan people. .

We must remember that the transition to socialism in peripheral societies has the popular masses playing a fundamental role in social transformation and the contradictions of dependent capitalism. Thus, it is necessary to adopt a critical lens to understand the Bolivarian Revolution as a dialectical process of struggle for sovereignty and the construction of a socialist alternative in a society marked by structural dependence and imperialist domination.

The international media blockade, economic sanctions and pressure from foreign governments opposed to Bolivarian socialism reinforces the thesis that the dominant elites, both international and national, act to maintain the dependent order and prevent the consolidation of alternative development experiences. The economic war promoted against Venezuela is a concrete example of imperialist attacks and domination. These economic sanctions aimed to suffocate the socialist project and make the Venezuelan population economically unviable.

Venezuela, however, is heading towards its economic recovery. It has been successful in creating alternative mechanisms to sanctions, which has proven to be fundamental thanks to cooperation in the context of a new multipolar world, with direct support from countries such as Russia, China and Iran. Venezuela is the fastest growing economy in North America. south, according to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), a growth of 6.2% in GDP in 2024. This growth was possible because the country overcame the “Dutch disease” — characterized by dependence on oil — through of import substitution forced by economic sanctions. Furthermore, it achieved food sovereignty by increasing its agricultural production exponentially.

Hugo Chávez reinterpreted the role of the State and the popular masses in the Latin American context. Chávez used the state apparatus to consolidate a revolutionary popular front, based on an anti-imperialist discourse and the economic and political democratization of the country. Hugo Chávez’s teachings are still alive and Chavismo’s gaze follows the entire historical process of resistance.

In political communication, Venezuela also has a lot to teach us. The act of swearing loyalty to the Chavista project, such as the “I Swear with Maduro” movement, materially exemplifies the mobilization of the popular masses as a driving force for social transformation. On January 10, faced with international isolation and a major media attack, President Nicolás Maduro deepened his dialectical commitment between the People and the Government in the “I swear with Maduro” act. The active participation of the people in a socialist project is essential to ensure that the transformation process is not only state-based, but also a revolution in social and cultural structures. The practice of swearing with the government reflects a mutual commitment, in which the government positions itself as the legitimate representative of popular demands and the masses assume collective responsibility for defending and building the revolution. Thousands of Venezuelans swore loyalty to the socialist struggle with Maduro.

Nicolás Maduro is the heir to Chávez’s socialist and anti-imperialist project, but he updates political discourse and practice to include the anti-fascist struggle as a central element. Very attentive to far-right movements on the continent, Venezuela quickly understands the new historical conditions, such as the advance of conservative and authoritarian forces on a global level, represented by the rise of leaders such as Jair Bolsonaro and Javier Milei. They are updated towards an anti-imperialist and anti-fascism struggle, and reinforce the role of the organized masses, including political parties, communes and social movements, in defending sovereignty and in the fight against new expressions of domination.

It is urgent that Latin American progressive forces update their analyzes and understand that with Trump’s victory, there is no option for the empire to be an ally against the extreme right in the region. Today the USA represents imperialism and fascism, and this materializes as its foreign policy and power option to perpetuate North American hegemony in the face of the threat of a multipolar world. Faced with this, we must create an anti-fascist cordon, the construction of an anti-fascist front to resist the offensives of the extreme right, international capital and local elites.
The Bolivarian Revolution represents a living example of the struggle for sovereignty in peripheral societies, facing imperialist domination and the internal contradictions of dependent capitalism. The updating of the Chavista discourse to incorporate anti-fascism reflects the ability of the Bolivarian project to adapt to historical conditions, without losing sight of its fundamental principles of social justice and popular emancipation. Therefore, it is urgent to understand that the Bolivarian Revolution is not just a political process, but a continuous exercise of resistance and transformation, where people and government intertwine in a common struggle against the forces of capital and for the construction of a more just and egalitarian society. .