Ultimas Noticias asked Alan Woods a
series of key questions about the Venezuelan revolution and the dangers
in the situation that flow from the lack of initiative in taking the
revolution forward and finally completing it with the expropriation of
key sectors of the economy. We reproduce that interview here.
16 2009 – Alan Woods represents the hard line wing of the revolution.
It is not a question of building new structures on the old base as the
reformists ideologists propose. For Woods, the revolution requires a
new base, a clean break with the old rule of the oligarchy. Regular
visitor to Venezuela since Hugo Chávez came to power, Woods talked to Últimas Noticias about the current situation of the Bolivarian process.
How could you explain a revolutionary process which has not touched the financial sector, which is the backbone of capitalism?
This is the crucial problem.
Here we have started a revolution, a lot has been achieved, but we
have no right to say that the revolution has been completed. I think it
will not be completed until we carry out the expropriation, not of
everything, but the expropriation of the land, the financial sector and
the key industries.
There is a lot of talk about socialism, but if the economic power
remains in the hands of the same national oligarchy, revolution is not
possible. Hence the title of my book: Reformism or Revolution, Marxism and Socialism of the 21st Century – a reply to Heinz Dieterich.
Are we in a reform or in a revolution?
We are in a revolution, but it has not been carried out to the final
conclusion and this is dangerous, because the whole of history shows
that it is impossible to carry out half a revolution.
What are the dangers we are facing?
A number of nationalisations have been carried out, but we have
still not touched the centre of power: the financial sector. Therefore,
on the one hand we do not have a socialist planned economy, but on the
other hand we do not allow the capitalist system to work according to
its normal laws, and this at the end of the day leads to chaos, the
worst of both worlds. If investment is in private hands, then the
bosses only invest for their own benefit. You cannot plan what you do
not control. These decisions, so important for Venezuela, are not in
the hands of the Venezuelans.
In whose hands are they?
In the hands of those who have controlled them always, a handful of
rich who continue to control key and basic parts of the economy, and
particularly the financial sector. Until this central problem is not
solved, there will be a danger.
From this perspective, the banks should be nationalised …
Of course, this is point number one. Without nationalising the banks
it is impossible to take the necessary decisions to control investment
and the productive sector.
For 11 years, the Venezuelan people have shown enormous loyalty to
president Chávez. They saved the revolution in 2002, during the coup
and then during the recall referendum. But there is a limit to the
patience of the people. When a peasant, a worker, sees how his basic
problems are not solved, then we can witness a process of
disillusionment, of tiredness, and I am afraid, there is something very
worrying. The threat of counter-revolution has not gone away, it is
still there. Up until now the masses have always voted for Chávez, but
there are serious problems of a certain worsening of conditions, the
reforms are being affected by the economic crisis, there are also
problems of corruption, bureaucracy, careerism.
In these conditions, the danger is that the right wing will go on to
a real offensive. This seems to me to be a more serious threat than
Colombia.
The main danger I see is not external, but internal.
Don’t you think that at this point the government has become counter-revolutionary?
No. I wouldn’t say that, but it is a government that is not doing
what it should be doing. There are vacillations, almost permanent
indecision, confusion. There is also a serious problem of bureaucracy.
I think that president Chávez is a very courageous and sincere man, but one man alone cannot make a revolution.
Is Chávez alone?
Yes, I think so, below him there is a thick layer of bureaucracy
which does not share his ideas. The bureaucracy is
counter-revolutionary, it reflects the ideas of the bourgeoisie within
the Bolivarian movement.
Without control by the rank and file, then the problem of the bureaucracy can never be solved.
Sacrifices yes, but there must be sacrifices for all.
Right now it would seem that it is only the people that makes sacrifices…
That’s true, you have mentioned the two first key problems of this revolution
This is the reason why we need to make a criticism, criticism is
very necessary. I am not criticising the Bolivarian revolution, nor
president Chávez, but these deformations of the revolution which do
exist.
But do you not think that just as it is important to
criticise, there must also be a readiness of the government to listen
to these criticisms?
Some do listen, but there is a layer which is not interested in these criticisms at all …
Is president Chávez, amongst those who are not interested?
I think that president Chávez is aware of this. But, how can one man
fight against this on his own …?
There must be a revolution within
the revolution.
Source: Aporrea
