|
September 29, 2012 - No. 36
25th Anniversary of Annexationist
Free
Trade with the United States
Free Trade -- The Strengthening of
Private
Monopoly Rule and the Necessity for
Economic and Political
Renewal
25th
Anniversary
of
Annexationist
Free
Trade
with
the
United
States
• Free Trade -- The Strengthening of
Private Monopoly Rule and the Necessity for Economic and
Political Renewal - K.C. Adams
United
States Presidential Election
• A Dysfunctional Congress - Voice of Revolution
• Obama's "Choice Between Two
Different Paths"
• The Obama-Clinton Alliance
• Romney's Conception of the Right
Direction for America
Venezuelan Election
2012
• People March for Chavez' Victory
and in Defence of Bolivarian Revolution - Claude Brunelle -
Mexican Election Fraud
• Mexico's Future - Pablo Moctezuma
Barragán
25th Anniversary of Annexationist
Free
Trade with the United States
Free Trade -- The Strengthening of
Private
Monopoly Rule and the Necessity for
Economic and Political
Renewal
- K.C. Adams -
 Canadian free trade
agreements beginning 25 years ago with the United
States represent monopoly capital's tightening grip over the country's
political
and economic affairs. Political and economic power has gradually
consolidated
in the hands of the most powerful private interests mostly centred in
the U.S.
This economic and political power has moved to crush any blocks within
the
national public and private institutions to the exercise of its
dominance and
monopoly right, including Parliament, the National Assembly,
Legislatures,
trade unions and other organisations of civil society.
Private monopoly power is the merger of banking and
industrial capital
into finance capital. Finance capital has used free trade as a weapon
to expand
and consolidate its grip on all aspects of political and economic life.
Its base
is found within the United States of North American Monopolies but its
reach
is anywhere within the imperialist system of states, especially those
states
within the Anglo-U.S. sphere of influence.
Free trade represents the end of the raison
d'état of the
original Canada as a nation-building project to block U.S.
continentalism.
Today attempts are made to establish a new raison d'état
in which
Canada is a vassal within a United States of North American Monopolies,
dedicated to the U.S. imperialist striving for world domination as it
competes
with others within the imperialist system of states. This is a system
that the
global monopolies use to oppress and exploit the peoples of the world
and
their natural resources and the value produced from their work.
The financial oligarchy has used the private monopolies
to conquer Canada
and Mexico to establish their dominance in North America and extend
their
tentacles beyond with free trade arrangements with others within the
U.S.-dominated system of states including Canada with Mexico, Israel,
Chile,
Peru, Costa Rica, Colombia, Jordan, the non-European Union states of
the
European Free Trade Association, Panama (presently before Parliament)
and
multi-state free trade arrangements in the works with the European
Union
(CETA) and most Pacific/Asian states (TPP) excluding specifically China
and
the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. This expansion along with
predatory wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Syria, and
direct
political interference and threats against all countries in the world
is most
commonly referred to as neo-liberal globalization.
 The economic figures since
the signing of the free trade agreement in 1987
tell a tale of rising dominance of the largest global monopolies.
According to
a new study by BMO Nesbitt Burns, total investment in Canada
originating
from the U.S. (in current dollars) rose from $76 billion in 1988 to
$326 billion
in 2011. During the same period, investment into the U.S. originating
in
Canada went from $55 billion to $276 billion. This movement and merging
of
finance capital forms the economic base of Canada's annexation within
the
U.S. Empire from which neo-liberal globalization extends its reach
throughout
the world economically, militarily and politically.
The level of bilateral commodity trade between Canada
and the U.S.
although important suggests that the heart of free trade is the
unrestricted
movement of monopoly capital. Bilateral exports with the U.S. totalled
about
$100 billion a year in the late 1980s, rose to $350 billion a year by
2000 under
free trade, flattened out after that, declined during the 2008-10
crises and now
still remain below the amount for 2000. The BMO study says, as a per
cent
of Canada's nominal gross domestic product in current Canadian dollars
just
before free trade, exports to the U.S. represented 17 per cent of
Canada's
GDP. By 2000, those exports had reached their pinnacle at 33 per cent
and
since have fallen back to 19 per cent just above the pre-free trade
percentage.
 A significant change has
occurred in how Canadians acquire their living
since free trade. The most startling change has been the loss of
manufacturing
jobs. In the first two years of the FTA, 200,000 manufacturing jobs
disappeared. A partial recovery occurred in the mid-nineties but during
the last
decade, the wrecking of manufacturing has accelerated. Statistics
Canada
reports that from the low 20 per cent range of manufacturing relative
to the
total GDP prior to free trade, the percentage fell steadily to 15.6 per
cent in
2005 and down further to 13 per cent by 2010. Some of this decline can
be
attributed to greater productivity but the majority is a result of
deliberate
conscious policies of the dominant global monopolies to outsource
manufacturing to other countries including the U.S. The political rule
of free
trade and its unrestricted movement of capital allow the global
monopolies the
freedom to wreck the economy, privatise or otherwise degrade social
programs
and public services including regulations governing corporate
behaviour, make
regressive changes to the taxation regime moving towards more
individual
taxes such as the GST and user fees and away from corporate taxes, and
do
whatever else that serves their narrow monopoly interests.
The political rule and concentrated expression of free
trade is the exercise
of monopoly right over public right in all matters and domains, and the
dominance of private monopoly interests within the public political
institutions.
The rights of all, especially the working class, are under extreme
pressure. All
important political matters are decided in camera by those private
monopoly
interests directly involved and the executives of their political
representatives.
All forms of civil and labour rule and rights considered important to
establish
equilibrium under the Canadian raison d'état in
opposition to U.S.
continentalism such as the Canadian Wheat Board are now abolished,
simply
not utilised or under pressure to disband.
The challenge facing the working class and its allies is
to step forward as
the social force capable to establish a new Canadian raison
d'état
within a nation-building state based on recognition of the rights of
all and the
sovereignty of all nations, which means in practice the ending of all
military
agreements with the U.S. and participation in its predatory wars and
immediate
exit from NATO and NORAD;
 - self-reliance of the economy with
manufacturing as its foundation and the
guarantee of the well-being of the people under all circumstances;
- equal trade for mutual benefit with all nations
regardless of their political
regime, which means in practice the annulment of all current free trade
agreements and the ending of any use of the dominant currencies to
settle trade
or as a reserve fund;
- the inalienable right of the Canadian people and First
Nations to
ownership and control of all their natural resources;
- the inalienable right of the Canadian people to
control the
decision-making process for all development and affairs that affect the
socialised economy and the social and natural environment;
- the empowerment of the sovereign people within modern
renewed
political institutions that guarantee the right of the people to govern
themselves
and their own affairs.
Public Right Yes! Monopoly Right No!
Manufacturing Yes!
Nation-Wrecking No!
United States Presidential Election
A Dysfunctional Congress
- Voice of Revolution* -
When Congress ended its current session to break for the
elections, there
were headlines like, "Unproductive and Unloved, Congress Heads
Home" (McClatchy) and "Congress Wraps Up, Leaving Work Until After
Election," (Washington Post).
Republican Senator John McCain is quoted
saying Congress was "Leaving town in disgrace." A lobbyist adds, "This
is the
most dysfunctional Congress I can remember."
As well, Congress passed only a minimum "stop-gap"
six-month funding
measure to keep government functioning when the fiscal year ends
September
30. The bill itself further discredited Congress as it was seen as a
self-serving
move that resolved none of the budget issues while preventing a
government
shut down in the weeks leading up to the election.
News reports also emphasized that Congress is so
discredited its approval
ratings have remained at about 13 percent, the lowest ever recorded.
The past
18 months of Congressional activity is said to be the most unproductive
ever.
Even minor bills that used to routinely pass were stalled with bitter
contention
before passing (such as funding for highway repairs and interest rates
for
student loans).
The failure of the existing set up to resolve conflicts
within the ruling
circles was noted in the fact that major bills, such as those for the
budget,
taxes, the farm bill and post office were left for the lame duck
session -- that
is the session after the November 6 elections but before the swearing
in of a
new Congress (January 3, 2013) and president (January 21, 2013). That
session
is scheduled to start November 13.
Further, the spectre of forced across the board budget
cuts of $1.2 trillion -- due to take place January 2, before the new
Congress is sworn in --
has been
raised. These automatic cuts, which also greatly impact the Pentagon,
were
part of the 2011 Budget Control Act (BCA) which itself
involved
intense contention over raising the debt ceiling and $1 trillion in
cuts to social
programs.
News reports also reminded everyone of the threats made
by the financial oligarchy at the time the BCA was passed in August
2011, which included a lowering of the federal government's credit
rating. Rating agency Standard and Poor's, for
example, said, "The political brinkmanship of recent months highlights
what we
see as
America's governance and policy making becoming lass stable, less
effective
and less predictable than what we previously believed." These
current new
reports emphasized that still, more than a year later, no resolution
for the
budget is in sight. Indeed, Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat from Nebraska
who
sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee and is chair of its
Legislative
subcommittee said, "If you kick the can down the road you continue to
further
uncertainty, and inconsistency, and a lack of predictability. That's
what this
Congress has done, because of its refused to deal with issues."
Congress has been completely discredited, unable to
contend with the budget. There is perpetual conflict while the looming
budget cuts are to be dealt with by this same lame-duck Congress. All
of it sets the stage for further executive action by the President.
This does not bode well for the American working class
and people nor will it resolve any conflicts within the ruling class.
Despite the fact that it represents the usurpation of power by force
and its use to further private interests by playing one faction against
the other, President Obama is full of empty phrases to cover up the
role he is playing. He recently emphasized that he is the one who
represents "all the people." He says he is prepared to make "a whole
range of compromises" that some Democrats as well as Republicans may
not like. In a recent Associated Press interview he underlined, "The
days of viewing compromise as a dirty word need to be over because the
American people are tired of it." And he warned, if Congress cannot
make the compromises necessary, "I'm going to have to look at how we
can work around Congress." He declared this is necessary to make sure
"we are meeting our responsibilities when it comes to the deficit
reduction and investing in the future." More recently he has put it
this way: "One thing I've learned as president is that you represent
the entire country." Carrying on the theme that he represents the
people against the Washington "insiders," he added, "Most important is,
you can't change Washington from inside, only from the outside. That's
how some of our biggest accomplishments like health care got done --
mobilizing the American people."
Obama, in contending to remain champion for the ruling
circles, is
indicating that he is the one who can keep the battling factions
together and
possibly secure a compromise. And, failing that, he has plans to "go
around
Congress," by "mobilizing the American people" behind presidential rule.
It is not coincidental that the issue at stake is the
budget. Control of the
purse strings is the main power Congress has retained, while
capitulating to the
president's usurpation of power on many matters, like the power to
declare war.
Given
that Congress is discredited and there is broad anger with current
conditions,
it is possible that the lame-duck session of Congress will be used as
an
opportunity for the president to seize the power over the purse strings
and put
in place some form of executive rule and even broader use of the police
state
powers of the presidency.
Democratic National Convention
Obama's "Choice Between Two Different Paths"
Protest at 2012
Democratic National Convention.
The Democratic Party held its 2012 Convention in
Charlotte, North Carolina from September 4 to 6. President Barack Obama
began his speech at the Democratic National Convention by describing
the broken nature of the existing electoral system when it comes to
providing an informed vote and equal access: "I know campaigns can seem
small, and even silly sometimes. Trivial things become big
distractions. Serious issues become sound bites. The truth gets buried
under an avalanche of money and advertising. If you're sick of hearing
me approve this message, believe me, so am I." He did not however offer
any proposals to change this set up in a manner that favours the
people.
Instead he emphasized "When you pick up that ballot to vote, you will
face the clearest choice of any time in a generation. Over the next few
years, big decisions will be made in Washington, on jobs, the economy;
taxes and deficits; energy, education; war and peace, decisions that
will have a huge impact on our lives and our children's lives for
decades to come. And on every issue, the choice you face won't be just
between two candidates or two parties. It will be a choice between two
different paths for America."
There is little doubt big decisions will and are being
made. And that Obama and Romney offer different proposals for the
current problems society faces. What is absent however is any proposal
for a new direction for the economy and political affairs. Decisions
are being made that have a huge impact on peoples lives, yet they have
no control over these decisions -- the existing set-up does not permit
the will of the majority on issues like war and peace and the economy
to carry any weight. It blocks decision-making by the people and
guarantees that while Obama and Romney offer "two different paths,"
they are paths headed in the same old direction of a society of, by and
for the rich.
Like Romney, Obama attempts to use U.S. chauvinism to
rally people to his side, saying Americans work "harder and smarter
than anyone else," and that "Together, I promise you, we can
out-educate and out-compete any nation on earth." Teachers certainly do
not become teachers to take up this chauvinist aim of beating down and
oppressing Chinese, Indian or German children or children of any
nation. On the contrary,
working people of the U.S. seek relations of mutual respect and benefit
with their fellow workers abroad. They share a common fight for
rights, not to "out-compete" each other.
The content of "out-educate and out-compete" means
ensuring U.S. success in the global economy. It means empire-building
in
social, psychological, economic and political terms. It is no doubt for
this reason that the paths of Obama and Romney have in common that, "We
will sustain the strongest military the world has ever
known," (Obama) and "[We will preserve a military that is so strong no
nation would ever dare test it," (Romney).
Obama and Romney also share in common the preservation
of the "free enterprise system," which today is a system of monopoly
capitalism. Obama put it this way: "We honor the strivers, the
dreamers, the risk-takers, the entrepreneurs who have always been the
driving force behind our free enterprise system, the greatest engine of
growth and prosperity the world has ever known."
Not a few listening to Obama's speech picked up on the
difficulties he and the ruling circles he represents face in providing
anything
new or even serious in terms of solutions. Obama reiterated several
times what has now become a stale slogan: "If you believe in a country
where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share,
and everyone plays by the same rules, then I need you to vote this
November."
Whatever anyone may believe, this content certainly
clashes with reality. Inequality is increasing, workers have done far
more than "their fair share" while getting far less in wages, pensions
and health care. And the monopolies do not play by rules -- a contract
is no longer a contract, phony lockouts are commonplace and
bankruptcies are used as legal theft of the legitimate claims of the
workers on
the wealth they produce. How can this slogan which reflects the old
social contract be believed when that arrangement is finished?
Perhaps most significant about Obama's speech is his
effort to speak to the ruling circles as to why he should continue to
be their
champion. He says, "Our problems can be solved. Our challenges can be
met." He adds, "You can choose leadership that has been tested and
proven." He presents himself as better able to handle foreign affairs
and to convince working people to accept the path of defending the U.S.
Empire. He does this in part by jumbling together different forces and
then saying none are to blame for problems and "we" the ruling circles
and "we"
the people are all in this struggle together. "We don't think the
government can solve all our problems. But we don't think that the
government is the source of all our problems, any more than are welfare
recipients, or corporations, or unions, or immigrants, or gays, or any
other group we're told to blame for our troubles. Because America, we
understand that this democracy is ours. We, the People, recognize that
we have responsibilities as well as rights; that our destinies are
bound together; that a freedom which asks only what's in it for me, a
freedom without a commitment to others, a freedom without love or
charity or duty or patriotism, is unworthy of our founding ideals, and
those who died in their defense."
Patriotism and duty thus become military service and
making sure the unions, welfare recipients, immigrants, gays and others
all line
up behind the rich in their striving for world empire. The majority,
working people, are to be diverted from the reality that this so-called
democracy
and its electoral system is not under their control and does not serve
their interests. They are not the ones in control and need to sort out
how to win political power so that they are.
Protests at Democratic
National Convention
 
 
 
 
The Obama-Clinton Alliance
President Barack Obama called on former President Bill
Clinton to nominate him at the Democratic National Convention, and he
did so. An alliance
has clearly been struck and a deal of some kind made, as Clinton was
enthusiastic to participate. He especially emphasized why Obama should
be the
one to govern and be elected. It is likely that as the police powers of
the presidency continue to expand and arrangements of governance
serving to greatly lessen and even eliminate the role of Congress,
including for the budget are consolidated, some form of
dual-presidency that includes the former president and his wife,
current U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, will have a place.
This team
is seen as the winning combination to preserve the union and keep the
people's resistance in check.
In elaborating on governance, former President Bill
Clinton said, "We think 'we're all in this together,' is a better
philosophy than 'you're on your own.'" He added, "When times are tough,
constant conflict may be good politics but in the real world,
cooperation works better Unfortunately, the faction that now dominates
the Republican Party doesn't see it that way. They think government is
the enemy and compromise is weakness." He too repeated the old slogan
of a "nation of shared opportunities, shared prosperity and shared
responsibilities." And he concludes that the union can be preserved if
"we're all in it together." He said, "I know we're coming back. For
more than 200 years, through every crisis, we've always come out
stronger than we went in. And we will again as long as we do it
together. We champion the cause for which our founders pledged their
lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor -- to form a more perfect
union."
Obama also addressed his governing plans in an interview
with the Associated Press before the convention. When asked what he
would do if he wins and the Republicans retain control of the House,
Obama said he expects the Republicans to listen to the American people,
who in electing him "will have cast a decisive view on how we should
move the country forward." He added, "Republicans will have to make a
very concrete decision about whether they're willing to cooperate on a
balanced package," for the deficit, budget cuts and so forth. Then he
emphasized, "If they don't, then I'm going to have to look at how we
can work around Congress to make sure that middle-class families are
protected, but that we're still doing our -- meeting our
responsibilities when it comes to deficit reduction and investing in
the future."
He said the majority, including a lot of Republicans
agree with this "balanced approach." He also expressed his readiness to
compromise: "I'm prepared to make a whole range of compromises, some of
which I get criticized from the Democratic Party on, in order to make
progress. But we're going to need compromise on your side as well. And
the days of viewing compromise as a dirty word need to be over because
the American people are tired of it." He again targeted Congress saying
the need for compromise is "a message that will resonate not with every
Republican, but I think with a lot of fair-minded Republican
legislators who probably feel somewhat discouraged about having served
in one of the least productive Congresses in American history."
It is apparent, from remarks by Romney, Clinton and
Obama, that the ruling class is concerned about preserving the union in
conditions where the conflicts among them are intensifying and the old
arrangements, including party structures and Congress as an arena for
resolving conflict, are disintegrating. Obama and Clinton are
emphasizing the need for compromise and isolating those who refuse to
do so, whether
Democrats or Republicans. And there is the threat that Obama will go
around Congress and implement more of the broad
executive powers, such as those involving control of food, energy,
commerce and use of the military against Americans inside the country.
While it is not clear what deal was struck for Obama to
secure Clinton's support, what is clear is that this team and the
forces they represent are calling for compromise within the ranks of
the ruling class while also preparing to usurp yet greater power.
Republican National Convention
Romney's Conception of the Right Direction
for America
Protests at 2012
Republican National Convention.The 2012 Convention of the Republican Party was held in
Tampa, Florida from August 27 to 30. In his speech to the Republican
National Convention accepting his nomination for president, Mitt Romney
spoke to a problem both candidates face: the majority of
Americans doubt their children will have a better future. Working
people are contending with the fact, backed up by their experience,
that
the U.S. economy and political set up can no longer deliver on the
American Dream. The necessity for a new dream, a new direction that
favours the people is presenting itself. Blocking this new direction is
an important part of the elections for the ruling circles so as to
maintain the status quo. Hence talk of the "right" direction
is a main topic of the candidates.
Romney attempts to deal with the necessity for a new
direction by invoking the chauvinism of the U.S. ruling circles, that
the U.S. is the "greatest country in the history of the world." He says
Americans have a "unique blend of optimism, humility and utter
confidence that when the world needs someone to do the really big
stuff, you need an American." Evidently Romney thinks such chauvinism
will overcome the growing sentiment among workers that their path is
not to join the rulers in the "really big stuff'" of empire building
and "out-competing" their fellow workers worldwide, but rather to stand
as one with the workers and peoples of the world, against U.S. wars and
against the brutal attacks on workers here and worldwide.
After speaking of his childhood and family life, Romney
continues with these efforts at chauvinism saying, "Now is the moment
when we can stand up and say, 'I'm an American. I make my destiny. And
we deserve better! My children deserve better! My family deserves
better. My country deserves better!'" He adds, "The President has
disappointed America because he hasn't led America in the right
direction. He took office without the basic qualification that most
Americans have and one that was essential to his task. He had almost no
experience working in a business. Jobs to him are about government. I
learned the real lessons about how America works from experience."
In this manner Romney makes clear that he and the
monopoly forces backing him believe having a CEO for president is what
is needed. The country is to be run like a business with "success"
measured in how much the government pays the rich and guarantees
monopoly right -- to close factories, make big scores at the expense of
workers, their jobs, pensions and the economy as a whole. As Romney put
it, "In America we celebrate success, we don't apologize for it." He
adds, "Business and growing jobs is about taking risk, sometimes
failing, sometimes succeeding, but always striving. It is about dreams
It's the genius of the American free enterprise system -- to harness
the extraordinary creativity and talent and industry of the American
people with a system that is dedicated to creating tomorrow's
prosperity rather than trying to redistribute today's."
Long experience confirms that this "right direction" of
Romney's is the tired and old path of the rich getting richer and the
poor poorer. The fight by workers for their rights -- for wages and
pensions commensurate with the jobs they do and a U.S. standard -- is
placed in contradiction to prosperity and presented as a negative
thing. Meanwhile, taking risks with the social wealth produced by the
workers for the private enrichment of a few -- as Romney's company is
notorious for -- is
the success to be celebrated. Romney here is not describing the modern,
new direction for the economy needed to solve the problems of today, an
economy geared to guaranteeing the rights of the people, like the
rights to a livelihood and pensions. A new direction and discussion on
how to achieve it is to be blocked.
In closing Romney also speaks to a growing concern among
the ruling circles, of the need for unity to "restore the promise of
America."
The concern is not only about the effort to convince working people to
unite
behind the rich and serve their interests, it is also whether unity
among the ruling circles themselves can be preserved. Romney pledges
allegiance
to the United States of the North American Monopolies and emphasizes
that a president
that is CEO and a government that is no longer a government but a
business, is the way to preserve the country.
Protests at Republican
National Convention
 
Venezuelan Election 2012
People March for Chavez' Victory and in Defence of
Bolivarian
Revolution
- Claude Brunelle -
Venezuelan President and
presidential candidate Hugo Chavez greets his supporters during at a
rally in
Charallave city, State of Miranda, Venezuela, on Sept. 9, 2012.
On October 7, more than 16 million registered voters
will vote in the
presidential elections in Venezuela. They will choose between the
re-election
of President Hugo Chavez, the candidate supported by the Great
Patriotic Pole
(GPP)[1] and Henrique Capriles, the candidate of the
right-wing neo-liberal
Coalition for Democratic Unity (MUD).[2]
Ten days before the election, the independent polling
firms Consultores
and International Consulting Services (ICS) predicted President Chavez
would
win. Consultores gave figures of 57.5 per cent to 42.5 per cent in
favour
of Chavez and similarly ICS gave and 60.01 per cent to 39.2 per cent.
In keeping with the tradition that each district
organizes a march to
accompany their favourite candidate, millions of Venezuelans have been
taking
part in these marches across the country since the start of the
election period
chanting in unison, "Chavez is the country's heart!"
Speaking at one of these popular assemblies, on
September 26 in the state
of Falcon, President Chavez said, "We must win overwhelmingly on
October
7. For this it is necessary that we begin immediate mobilization in
every
neighbourhood, every street, every village, every city, everywhere so
that not
a single vote is left out." Referring to his lead over the right-wing
candidate,
Chavez emphasized that even if it is a given that he will win the
election, "We
need to work hard, no one should let their guard down, we have not only
the
obligation to win, but to have a strong win."
This call for a decisive win aims to demonstrate support
for the Bolivarian
revolution and neutralize the intentions of the opposition to
destabilize the
country by refusing to recognize the election results. Indeed, MUD
executive
secretary, Ramón Guillermo Aveledo, referring to the possibility
that political
organizations that are members of his coalition will not recognize the
official
election results, said MUD will only respect results that they consider
to be
"trustworthy." This statement was made two days after the agitator Yon
Goicoechea published an article in the newspaper El Universal,
entitled
"Fraud
Is
Not
Free."
Goicoechea
claims
that
the
October
7
results
"will
not
be
determined by facts, as today it is known that Henrique
[Capriles] will
win that contest. What there will be that night is a military decision
which, being a mistaken one, will generate a massacre." The article
suggests
that the National Electoral Council will commit fraud during the
elections and
claims that opposition supporters will take to the streets to defend
their vote,
likening this to the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989. Goicoechea was
one of
the principal organizers of the 2007 protests by student groups opposed
to the
Chavez government which were ultimately aligned with the reactionary
forces
that serve U.S. interests. It should be noted that for this activity,
Goicoechea
was awarded the Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty in 2008,
worth
U.S.$50,000, by the U.S. libertarian think tank the Cato Institute.
At the same time, former U.S. ambassador Patrick Duddy,
who was
expelled from Venezuela in 2008 for collaborating in a coup with a
group of
military officers, wrote a paper published this September by the U.S.
Council on Foreign relations
calling for sanctions against Venezuela "if the election results appear
fraudulent." Duddy writes that "the United States should encourage
international
pressure," and "freeze individual bank accounts of key figures involved
or
responsible and seize assets in the United States" or "arrange for the
proceeds
of Venezuelan government-owned corporate entities to be held in escrow
accounts." On the issue of military options he asserted that "While
Chavez
loyalists dominate the Venezuelan high command, it is not clear to what
extent
they control the middle ranks." This is a clear reference to U.S.
intentions to bribe a fringe of the Venezuelan military.
In June, Robert Zoellick, then president of the World
Bank said just before
his resignation, "Chavez's days are numbered. If his subsidies to Cuba
and
Nicaragua are cut, those regimes will be in trouble." He referred to
U.S.
support for Capriles, who if elected plans to restore "favourable"
relations with
the United States and review assistance programs and alliances with the
countries of Latin America and the Caribbean.
In addition, for the past several weeks in the United
States, monopoly
media such as Bloomberg, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News
and
the Miami Herald have been spreading disinformation by
repeating the story that Capriles is gaining ground, that Chavez's days
are numbered, that Chavez uses groups linked to the Bolivarian
revolution to
create an atmosphere of threats, terror and vandalism. They even accuse
President Chavez of manipulating information in the media, while
everyone
knows that the majority of the print, television and radio media in
Venezuela
are in the opposition's hands.
Finally, scenarios to destabilize the country on the
night of October 7 and
the following days are being implemented, with the clear intent to
overthrow
President Chavez, in addition to the increasing acts of sabotage
happening
across the country. Most recently there has been the sabotage of wiring
in
electrical substations causing blackouts in Caracas and other regions.
This situation highlights why President Chavez so
vigorously insists on the
importance this election has for the future of the Bolivarian
revolution and the
Venezuelan nation. He called on Venezuelans to not permit a return to
the
situation of the 1980s, underscoring that a vote for his continued
leadership
of the Bolivarian revolution "is a vote for the youth, the future,
security,
stability and development."
Notes
1. The Great Patriotic Pole (Gran Polo
Patriótico, GPP), includes
the left-wing parties such as the United Socialist Party of Venezuela,
Communist Party of Venezuela, the party Fatherland for All and social
organizations and unions and comprises more than 34,000 organizing
committees.
2. The Coalition for Democratic Unity (Mesa de la Unidad
Democrática, MUD), is an alliance of right-wing parties opposed
to the
Bolivarian revolution and has close ties with the United States. It
recently lost four
smaller parties as members when a confidential document was released
revealing
the true neo-liberal agenda that its candidate Capriles, intends to
pursue if
elected President.
Mexican Election Fraud
Mexico's Future
- Pablo Moctezuma Barragán* -
When the Electoral Tribunal of the Federal Judiciary
(TEPJF) declared
Enrique Peña Nieto president elect of Mexico in this year's
Mexican
presidential election, it laid bare the anti-democratic power of the
political
mafia imposed on the Mexican people's popular will. It shed light on
the big
corporations' dictatorship over the party system and the alternation
between the
Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and the National Action Party
(PAN) as the party in power.
The deception is vast; the TEPJF claims to be pure as
the driven snow however, it validated the election before the
Fiscal Unit of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) has published its
opinion on how Peña Nieto acquired his campaign funds and how
they were spent. Instead, the TEPJF cynically announced that the fiscal
report on the campaigns will be given in February 2013. It even gave
its ruling without conclusive information on the campaign reports to be
delivered in October.
The TEPJF didn't conduct a thorough review of the
electoral process and, like the IFE, acted as an agent of PRI's fraud.
The Mexican people saw through the cover-up of an election which was
neither free nor fair nor legitimate as per Article 41 of the
Constitution.
And the supposed votes Peña received? Of the 82
million Mexicans of
voting age only 23 percent, a paltry minority, chose the "golden boy of
Atlacomulco." [Atlacomulco is Peña Nieto's hometown -- TML
Ed.
Note.] This feeble result came despite all the illegal propaganda
over
seven years that Peña Nieto undertook at public expense as
Governor of the
State of Mexico, along with the support of Televisa and the entire
media's
disinformation apparatus during the campaign. Not to mention the
millions of votes bought through
pre-paid gift cards for the Soriana grocery chain and the Monex bank,
as well
as calling cards, construction materials, employment promises, payments
from
the state's social benefit programs, animals and other gifts, or
otherwise extorted through threats and
blackmail. The PRI exceeded campaign spending by 336 million pesos,
more than 15 times the allotted amount. Meanwhile the IFE permitted
inequity in the
process that saw nearly 4,000 public appearances by Peña Nieto.
As well, there are all the cases of electoral fraud in various regions
of the country, particularly in
Chiapas and Yucatan such as rigged polls and pundits hired to enforce
the
perception of Peña Nieto's imminent triumph.
More than three-quarters of Mexicans rejected PRI's
return and its corrupt
governance that seeks the eternal alternation of PRI and PAN as the
party in power to
pursue the same politics and submission to Washington's dictate that
the Mexican state must serve
the oligarchy. What's more, at least four million Mexicans are actively
engaged and tenaciously pursuing change in Mexico. This struggle for
democracy is unfolding in Mexico City and in almost all the Mexican
states;
there is a constant militant mobilization. Of the two opposing camps
there are
those who wish to impose PRI's return -- the elites and financial
oligarchy which benefit from neo-liberal policies -- versus the people
who are victimized by these policies and are searching for an
organization to move the situation forward and which step by step can
develop itself. Its first task is to unite those who are still
disinformed or manipulated by the media propaganda in the service of
those in power.
Externally, the U.S. empire has intervened decisively in
favour of PRI's
return which serves its own interests by consolidating bipartisanship
in the Mexican
government and feigning democracy with the "alternation" of parties.
Peña
Nieto has promised to continue the "war on drugs" and U.S.-Mexico
military
integration, open up Mexico's state-owned petroleum company PEMEX to
"partnerships" with private companies, and faithfully follow U.S.
neo-liberal
policies, as well as to serve the interests of foreign corporations by
preserving
and deepening their privileges. The fight against the 2012 election
fraud and
PRI is vital for the vast majority of Mexicans because of the urgent
need to defend sovereignty and rights.
The overwhelming majority of people know that this
election was rigged, bought and
unconstitutional. Those who have taken action across the country are
increasing and have made progress. For this very reason the campaigns
to
demoralize and repress the people are deepening. But this is not time
for the democratic movement to despair but to take action. The people
of Mexico are fed up. They are taking action to put an end to an entire
era of corruption, impunity and injustice. They are preparing to end
the old world of subservience, violence and chaos in favour of a new
world of sovereignty and rights, peace and well-being. The old refuses
to die and brazenly and cynically tries to impose its domination. The
new brings all the strength of youth and the future, the potential of
the working class, indigenous peoples, women and patriots. The old is
rotten and cannot prevail. The new will tenaciously resist until
victory. The first step is democratic renewal so the people have the
decision-making power in their hands.
Our time is now! The future is ours! Venceremos! We will
prevail!
PREVIOUS
ISSUES | HOME
Read The Marxist-Leninist Daily
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|
