In the last few days, a reader answered me to the question I asked in a previous article (see This is not a Transitional Statute, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/this-is-not-transitional-statute.html), Is that the opposition we need, and if not that, then what should it be? And at this point in time, with everything that has happened in Venezuela, I would dare to answer that none, because it is better to be alone than in bad company. But that question should have an answer, even more so when the official opposition we have, which has already been in a row, is fighting for the Presidency in Charge, fighting like drunks over an empty bottle.
What is the role of an opponent in a functioning democracy? Intuitively, we could say that the role of the opposition is fundamentally that of a comptroller. To be aware of the actions of those in power and to act as a counterweight to the decisions they make that affect the majority. To debate publicly in a democratic parliament what the government is doing and to block any initiative that it believes harms the country. From there derives the alternation in power that in the face of the people they serve, after democratic elections. That is the ideal scenario, the should be.
The opposition must change its role when whoever holds power ceases for some reason to be democratic in the government -even if it makes "elections", and in the best of cases it must disappear to become resistance. This is what happened in Venezuela during the dictatorship of Juan Vicente Gómez, and during the 10 years of the Military Junta of Marcos Pérez Jiménez. In both cases, the prevailing opposition was focused on the overthrow of the tyrants by force. No existing party during the first 60 years of the 20th century considered ways to coexist with the tyrants of their respective eras.
I can safely say that the main opposition political leadership of the first 60 years of the twentieth century, forged in the struggle against those two predominant tyrannies, were very clear about the position of the tyrants they faced, and knew that there was no room for coexistence. It was either them or the tyrants, without gray. The dead, persecuted, exiled and tortured in prison made it very clear and without any doubt. Unfortunately, during the following 40 years of the last century, they died one by one without leaving a political relay that fully understood it, but that lived, without major problems or tyrannies, the best 40 years of Venezuela, with income and democratic alternation.
The 21st century finds us Venezuelans without antibodies to fight the plague of a new tyranny, almost all of those who had lived through and fought it dead. What was left were the leftovers of some parties that were once the banners of democratic struggles, almost all of them turned into empty shells, without credibility. Hugo Chavez ran over them like a railroad, with the help of the powerful media of the time and the money of those who always score a winner.
And what did these parties do? Faced with the prospect of disappearing, they coexisted. The regime also needed them to give the appearance of democracy to the outside world. In 2012, after the 7-O elections, days before Chavez really died in Cuba, I deepened in this analysis of the symbiotic relationship between the regime and the official opposition, which at that time I called "formal". Nothing of what I wrote there 10 years ago has changed one iota: "That is the reason why they prefer Chávez to continue in power because that way they would survive in a mutual and disgusting symbiotic relationship, since on the one hand they claim to defend the values of democracy and on the other hand they betray it in conciliations and negotiations. And for no reason will they allow the state of affairs to change, nor the CNE to change, even if the jails are bursting with political prisoners who have been run over and harassed. That is why I think they are worse than the regime we are fighting and that is why Chávez defecates on them because, as well as the rest of his followers, they are on his payroll" (see in Spanish Symbiosis, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/2012/12/simbiosis.html).
Systematically, I have been following day by day this opposition game for many years, as the one who keeps a closed statistic that in time can predict with a very small error what could happen. I have done this for the benefit of the civil society, so that it may make its best decisions when it comes to support or not those who say they represent the interests of Venezuelans, reaching the regrettable conclusion that the regime will continue in power as long as we continue to support this miserable opposition. In fact, although the symbiosis is still mutualistic, the regime seems to depend more on that opposition than in those years, before the existence of Maduro in power.
What do I mean by this? That all this that has happened with the first vote of the National Assembly for the elimination of the Government in Charge and its very probable definitive approval, is nothing more than the demonstrative proof of the need for a change in the political leadership of the opposition. But that is easy to say. Venezuelans must be left without an official opposition so that the change that must necessarily take place in order to get out of the regime is understood once and for all. That is, the spontaneous emergence of new radical forms of opposition that will end up putting an end to the tyranny.
When the official opposition, the two toletes, those for and against the existence of the caretaker government, stop feeding on the assets of Venezuelans abroad, those who have actively worked against the existence of a solution to the problem of tyranny will disappear. Those are the real parasites of this story. Hence, I responsibly prefer that the regime kills the symbiotic relationship with this pseudo-opposition by keeping control of the assets abroad, because what this dogfight for the existence of a Government in Charge is all about is the survival of that monstrosity called G4.
To those who are shocked by the above statement, I say that the fight here is not for CITGO or the gold in London or the ill-gotten assets of the regime, NO. It is for the FREEDOM OF THIS COUNTRY. It is for the FREEDOM OF THIS COUNTRY. Once we have recovered the supreme good of freedom, as the Liberator called it, we will recover what we have to recover. Those who understand that are the opposition we need....
Caracas, December 27, 2022
Blog:
TIC’s & Derechos Humanos, https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario