Speakers attempt to explain strike crisis

www.usforacle.com By Vanessa Garnica Staff Writer February 07, 2003

In a packed room in Cooper Hall, visiting scholars from La Universidad Central de Venezuela discussed the political crisis of Venezuela, the fifth largest oil exporter in the world.

In a lecture titled "Ni Un Paso Atras" or "Not Even a Step Back," visiting scholars Omar Astorga and Ana Beatriz Martinez gave a vivid presentation on the delicate situation with which Venezuelans are currently dealing.

The two scholars addressed the events leading up to the legitimacy of Hugo Chavez, current president of Venezuela, as a leader and the various political scenarios that led to the present crisis.

"On Feb. 4, 1992, Chavez, then a lieutenant-colonel, led a coup into the presidential home that later failed. That was the beginning of Chavez's presence in Venezuelan homes, as he transmitted a televised message to those few soldiers that in silence collaborated with him," Astorga said.

Chavismo, a term used to describe a structure of radical ideas led by Chavez, constructed the reasoning on which the present Venezuelan crisis is justified.

In the seven years following Chavez's failed coup, Venezuela suffered from hyperinflation, the bankruptcy of the financial sector, skyrocketing unemployment and corrupted leaders. These factors inspired the majority of the people to elect a self-proclaimed radical, Chavez.

In 1999, Chavez was elected president of Venezuela. He won with not only the support from the popular sector but from the middle class, corporations, labor unions, media and intellectuals.

"Chavez proclaimed the end of the previous political period and the birth of a new one. To many he represented the hope for change," Astorga said. "He announced plans to help homeless children, improve the lives of indigenous people, eliminate corruption within the government and improve the poverty conditions in Venezuela by revamping housing, health and education."

Astorga said the creation of a new constitution, which was supported by the majority of the social sectors, was an important event in the reorganization of the state. Furthermore, this new document recognized human rights, particularly for the indigenous.

The media, especially television, plays a decisive role in Chavez's popularity. Every Sunday, Chavez transmits a state of the republic message that average four hours in length to the masses.

Astorga said Chavez had an accessible and popular image, that brought with it a promise for radical changes.

But many people started to doubt Chavez's intentions in late 1999. It began with the Chavistas.

The Chavistas are Chavez's supporters and/or members of Chavez's new radical political party. They held a wide majority in the national assembly. With that power, Chavez and the Chavistas were able to designate people in high places, such as in the supreme court and the office of attorney general. Chavistas eventually held power in most public offices.

"Because of that, the principle of separation of powers was put in danger," Astorga said. "People started to ask questions."

Early in Chavez's term, the price of a barrel of oil, Venezuela's main export, went up 100 percent. Chavez used this revenue to implement social programs to help communities across Venezuela.

"With programs such as these, Chavez's promises started to manifest with tangible actions and subsequently shown through the different media sources," Astorga said.

Chavez began losing popularity as he continued to present his weekly-televised addresses promising change and failing to deliver.

The unemployment numbers skyrocketed and the economy did not improve.

Martinez said media sources began reporting on the number of children in the streets and the numbers of corporations going bankrupt.

The Venezuelan people continued to question Chavez, who, in return, answered with promises.

"The Bolivarian Circles, named after Simon Bolivar, were 'social groups' created by Chavez to control the people within the communities ... These circles began to be associated with violence," Martinez said.

"Unexpectedly, Chavez started giving his speeches a radical twist ... He started talking about a revolution and openly suggested attacks on private property and mass media sources."

Chavez began to see the media as the enemy, but still tried to use it in his favor.

Martinez said, on his weekly televised message, Chavez said that private property was not sacred to those who own it.

With declarations such as these, Chavez began to lose popularity in the private sector as well as within the working class.

The media amplified the fracture of the leader just as much as they had shown his rise to the top.

"The president now wants to kill the messenger," Oscar Lucien, a famous Venezuelan moviemaker, said referring to Chavez's criticism of the press coverage of his administration.

From January 2002, the opposition led marches all over the country. A monumental event occurred on April 11, when a national march of more than a million people descended on the capital city of Caracas.

Martinez said 19 people were massacred by Chavez's sharp shooters as the march headed toward the presidential palace.

Chavez was forced to sign a letter of resignation, and a provisional president, Pedro Carmona, was sworn in.

Chavez came back to power the next day, and Carmona was removed.

The opposition has organized more than 60 marches. And more than 100 military officials have been cited with civil disobedience due to their open support to the opposition, Martinez said.

On Feb. 3, a two-month civic national strike involving all sectors of Venezuela, came to an end after massive financial losses for the nation.

Martinez said as of right now, Venezuela's poverty level is up 16 percent since Chavez took power. She said those without food have increased five percent and the unemployment rate has increased from 11 percent to 16 percent, she said.

Both Astorga and Martinez mentioned that scholars, sociologists, as well as philosophers, who are direct witnesses to these events, might have a disadvantage when giving an objective vision. However, Astorga and Martinez mentioned their intent to give those present an impartial talk by citing the news media such as El Nacional, El Universal, and Globovision.

If this history was real, did you believe that Chávez would have been returned to the power by the people? Think about it again... Rose Asistent Caracas - Venezuela

What a load of CRAP by these supposed students. For the REAL STORY about what is happening in Venezuela logon to VHeadline.com Venezuela at www.vheadline.com Roy S. Carson editor@vheadline.com

Letter addressed to: The Oracle, University of South Florida re: Article written by Vanessa Garnica, " Speakers attempt to explain strike crisis"

Well presented Vanessa Garnica....but I have a problem with the content....or perhaps, better stated, with the origins of the content:

the two visiting "scholars" (as your article calls them),Omar Astorga and Ana Beatriz Martinez.

I came to Venezuela in mid-December expressly to SEE with my own eyes what was really happening.......I could no longer believe the news coming out of El Nacional, El Universal, and Globovision (which appears to be the media sources quoted by the "scholars")....... the same Venezuelan privately owned media which is presently, and justifiably so, being taken to court by the Government since they have CLEARLY and PUBLICALLY broken the rules of their Charter and have participated DIRECTLY in the opposition's efforts to sabotage Venezuela and its Government....not to mention being ACTIVE participants in aiding and abetting in the destruction of the Venezuelan economy.....which included stockpiling and stoppage of manufacturing and distribution of Venezuelan food staples!

I have been traveling throughout more than half the country since my arrival.....and writing about what I see....on Vheadline.com.

What Omar and Ana SEE is what they want to see....... a few facts mixed into a lop-sided and pro-opposition format reminiscent of Globovision, RCTV, TeleVen, Venevision, El Nacional, El Universal, etc.....untruths and manipulation of facts and events in an attempt to oust Chavez (a democratically elected President) from power, particularly after the National Assembly DEMOCRATICALLY approved reformatory laws, including land reform (November 2001). For your information. Chavez's political party, MVR, holds 71 of 163 seats in the National Assembly.

Let me give your readers a few examples of the manipulation of events/facts demonstrated by Ana and Omar:

1)"....Chavismo, a term used to describe a structure of radical ideas led by Chavez, ......" Radical ideas?.....maybe for the middle-to-upper class Venezuelans....Radical ideas...like paying due income tax, like land and agrarian reform....which most developed nation has gone through in the past.....like attempting to raise the minimum wage .....which to date is still pitiful!....about 100-120$ US per month......like creating penal codes that are reflective of laws (past and present)...penal codes that were, in the past, either never created or conveniently neglected......Radical ideas?.....like serving saboteurs with court orders.............radical???????

2)"....."The Bolivarian Circles, named after Simon Bolivar, were 'social groups' created by Chavez to control the people within the communities ... These circles began to be associated with violence," Martinez said..... " Who began associating the Circulos Bolivarianos with violence?....the answer...the Venezuelan privately owned media....which is almost entirely anti-Chavez.

3. "...."Unexpectedly, Chavez started giving his speeches a radical twist ... He started talking about a revolution and openly suggested attacks on private property and mass media sources." ...." I challenge Martinez to show ONE precise instant in which Chavez actually SAID such a thing.......in the CORRECT context!

4)Here we go again... "...Martinez said 19 people were massacred by Chavez's sharp shooters as the march headed toward the presidential palace. ". Because Martinez says it is true, then it is true?. For your information....this has NEVER to date been authenticated....so, as far as I know, Martinez is lying through her teeth.

5)"....Chavez was forced to sign a letter of resignation, and a provisional president, Pedro Carmona, was sworn in.....". Not true.....Chavez did not resign....he was kidnapped by the people who led the coup (and apparently, the USA was heavily involved)........and the reason Chavez came back to power in less than 48 hours is because hundreds of thousands of people (mostly from the lower classes) marched to the Government buildings forced Carmona and his cronies out of office. Did Ana and Omar ever mention that none of the coup plotters and/or participants were criminally charged, none went to jail.......... and they (the opposition) call Chavez a dictator?

6. ".....On Feb. 3, a two-month civic national strike involving all sectors of Venezuela, came to an end after massive financial losses for the nation......." There is only one truth in this statement the rest is a complete lie! First of all, it WAS NOT a strike......... yes there were a few strikes for very short periods of time......but.......the vast majority of the stoppage was due to lockouts by the employers......and this is verifiably TRUE. In addition it was NOT at the national scale.... the biggest stoppages occurred in Caracas, Maracaibo, Valencia and Barquisimeto. The eastern and south eastern states were barely affected and the Andean region had little stoppages (central and south western states).... and all this is verifiably true. In addition the stoppage DID NOT involve all sectors of Venezuela.....the transportation industry never joined the stoppage willingly...at times they did not operate.....yes....but due to lack of fuel....the transportation industry Unions were repeatedly on TV stating that they NEVER said that they would join the stoppage.....even if Ortega and his opposition gang continuously said the contrary. Who are you going to believe....Ortega (who has apparently taken his family out of Venezuela) or the Transportation Industry Union Leaders? By the way, this is only one example....there are many more.

7. I do not know how Ana and Omar can state that they wanted to give an "impartial" talk.....when basing their information on El Nacional, El Universal, and Globovision. Think about it.

Oscar Heck oscarheck111@hotmail.com Reporter/Editorialist - Vheadline.com Venezuela