The Constitution, the fundamental legal framework of the Venezuelan State, defines in its fifth article the subject of national sovereignty: the people, also the repository of the original constituent power (article 347).
The sovereign we are talking about now is the human subject who is the protagonist of the organization and management of the political community; his sovereignty is institutional, historical. It is not, therefore, a sovereign in absolute, transcendent terms, which philosophy deals with and which is identified with the creator and divine provident, adorable according to the first commandment of the Decalogue. The supreme absolute, by the way, becomes for the believer the ultimate foundation of the legitimacy of the historical sovereign, as well as of the dignity and basic human rights of the human being; It thus becomes an indestructible defense against any totalitarian claim, both by despotic regimes (Nazi, fascist or communist type), as well as by circumstantial majorities in democratic systems.
The Venezuelan crisis that surrounds us is deep and global. And the official plan that manages it is – the bishops have made it explicit repeatedly – of a totalitarian type (not only autocratic or dictatorial). Our current political landscape resembles a “Gordian knot” (“kilo of tow”, in good Creole), as a tangle of illegitimacy and unconstitutionality, of schizophrenia and bicephalia with its inevitable international consequences. All this while the national disaster is accentuating and the first payers of the broken dishes are, as always, the most vulnerable socioeconomically. In the dissident majority, a notable political-partisan fragmentation is exhibited; this, like the Stockholm syndrome, is efficiently promoted by the socialist military regime, well trained in the pedagogy of intimidation and submission. The “we came to stay” is no longer the simple slogan of traditional despotic governments, but also and logically responds to the Marxist dogmatism of irreversibility towards communism.
This being the case, the urgent call for “national refoundation” made last year by the Episcopate is not surprising and, unfortunately, has not found the desirable support and implementation in the broad field of the opposition. Also disconcerting is the illusion of not a few groups before the votes (not elections) of 2024, while playing with a “dialogue” that has not yet been forged, because it lacks effective support from the main interlocutor, ideologically and pragmatically disinterested in participating. . With the instruments (CNE, SGCIM, TSJ, AN, High Command, etc.) and the “jurisprudence” available to the regime, an election cannot be anything other than a comedy. The international board, as a result of the invasion of Ukraine, does not offer a favorable framework for a prompt and democratic solution to the crisis in petro-dependent Venezuela.
Whoever writes this has insisted, looking for a positive way out for the country, in the identification of a nail-solution and the union of forces to nail it, without getting lost in a multitude of proposals and candidacies. That is why I remember and underline something already proposed as a legitimate and effective solution: the intervention of the sovereign with a constituent act, which corresponds to his complete and original power (Constitution, articles 5, 347-349). May all compatriots (of any ideology, opinion, political-partisan alignment, profession or occupation) residing here or emigrated, choose which country they want!
The national Episcopate exhorted, on the occasion of the 200 years of Carabobo: “Our gaze must be directed to the future, not as if new messianisms were expected or seen with fatalistic resignation… This entails promoting awareness of the role of all members of the Venezuelan people, the only and true social subject of its being and doing”. Let the people act as sovereign. And point.
The entrance Sovereign, present! was first published in THE NATIONAL.
