It is difficult for those left-wing organizations that maintain that there was no fraud in Venezuela to admit its existence, because the constitutional bodies legitimized by the Magna Carta that designed the elections have already declared a winner. This is what happened with relevant allegations of fraud in the world, such as those filed by Al Gore against Bush, by Trump against Biden, with Bolsonaro against Lula, without forgetting the alleged fraud of 1971 in Uruguay, claimed by Wilsonism against Bordaberry. All the complainants complied with the ruling of the constitutional bodies. With or without fraud, all the bodies issued their final resolution and the complainants complied. The world exception seems to be Venezuela, where the constitutional bodies that govern the elections are not taken into account.
On the other hand it is the only election in the world where dozens of countries and all the media in the world are speaking out for or against whether there was fraud or not, as if it were preparations for a third global war devastation. Is it because that territory hides the world’s largest proven reserves of hydrocarbons? Or is it because a revolutionary experiment grew in that country, different from the armed path of Lenin or Fidel Castro, and different from the peaceful path of Salvador Allende? Or is it because it is the first time that the left has come to power by peaceful means, but also for the first time, with the support of the Armed Forces, without them being coup-mongers? I do not believe in the sincerity of any of the governments or media that placed fraud in Venezuela at the top of the world agenda. I do believe in the sincere objections that Left-wing organizations and governments have called on the current leader of the Bolivarian revolutionary process to clearly clear up all the doubts sown by the enemies of Venezuelan socialism.
The left’s dilemma over Venezuela is not easy to resolve. On the one hand The Chavista revolution of 1999 that surprised the world and ended 40 years of oligarchic governments supported by the Punto Fijo Pact of 1958, attempting to destroy the edifice of inequality by applying the pedagogy of emancipation. A revolution that endured 936 sanctions that stole 642 billion dollars and all the gold deposited in London and despite this, it has achieved the agrarian miracle of food sovereignty, full employment and this year the most important economic growth in Latin America and lower inflation than Uruguay. And what is more important, the unconditional support for the most vulnerable and having won with only one contested election, 28 of the last 30 elections, called by the most plebiscitary government in the world. And At the other end of the dilemma, the worst possible opposition from an extreme right led by a self-confessed coup-monger of the 2002 putsch and a convener of the invasion of foreign troops in her own country, who appointed as her candidate someone who participated in the murders in El Salvador of Cardinal Romero, 2 nuns and 9 Jesuits.
In this dichotomy the left option seems easy, but it is not because The chromosomes on the left require the support of the majority And this has been questioned by the most rancid right and without evidence, but suspicion still hovers in the shadows, because the minutes have not been published, table by table. And this delay casts a shadow over the electoral process. The pathology of this suspicion requires precise surgery to be removed. The left, unlike the right, is transparency, political honesty, power supported by the majorities and if there are suspicions, it destroys them not only with the legality of the Electoral Court and the Supreme Court, but with the minutes in hand.. Here is the moral dilemma of the Latin American left. I exclude from this dilemma the president of Chile, who only has the space of his heart left as a leftist.
For the historical contribution of the surprising Hugo Chávez Frías, for the deepening of the unexpected Bolivarian process, For the credibility of the egalitarian utopia of the Latin American left, it is imperative to document the merciless suspicion that hurts us.
Let us remember with Rosa Luxemburg that “We fight for a world where we are socially equal, humanly different and totally free”And I continue to believe that socialist humanism remains the insurmountable horizon of our time. Therefore, it is inevitable that the legitimacy of the Venezuelan elections will shine without a doubt.
Despite everything, I continue to turn my back on pessimism.
