While the world's attention finds itself centered on the crises and catastrophes shaking the Middle East and Central Asia to its foundations, in Yanqui Imperialism's own back yard events of revolutionary proportions are unfolding which arouse enormous interest among working class and popular fighters all over the world. Latin America as a whole is passing through a pre-revolutionary period, whose progress could bring about an acceleration in the political crisis and new popular awakening in the United States.
The Latin American revolution is a fundamental historic process in the present world crisis.
The characteristics of a pre-revolutionary situation are clear: the popular rebellion of 2001 in Argentina and a new ascent in the struggles now underway at the present time; various rebellions and two mass insurrections in Bolivia, which have modified the historic relationship between the classes and a regime crisis and crisis of the State; the popular uprising and the forming of the Oaxaca Commune, in Mexico, as well as the mobilizations against election fraud; the continuous regional popular uprisings in Peru, especially in its mining zones; the historic intervention of the Venezuelan masses against the military coup of April, 2002 and against the capitalist lock out of December, 2002 - February, 2003. In last place, but more and more important, is Chile, shaken by the youth rebellion in education, the growing mining strikes and the irrefutable manifestations of a definitive exhaustion of the political regime of the Demo-Christian-Socialist Coalition and Bachelet´s government.
Since Latin America was, during the nineties, the favorite test bed for international finance capital piloted by the IMF, the conclusion, of international scope, emerging from this is that the capitalist crisis gives rise to rebellions, insurrections and revolutionary situations. Almost two decades after the dissolution of the USSR the main force behind the world political crisis is more than ever the irreversible historic decline of the capitalist organization of society.
Under such conditions, Latin America is the stage for a political experience, unique in its history, of a combination of center-left governments, in one case constituted by the historic left, like the PT of Brazil and the Frente Amplio (Broad Front) of Uruguay, and in other cases by that same left integrated with military or indigenist nationalism, as occurs in Bolivia, Venezuela and, partially, in Ecuador, or in the case of Argentina, making an amalgam of part of Peronism with the traditional left. The immense majority of these forces in the government have their origins in the same political womb-the home of the so-called São Paulo Forum for what will soon be twenty years.
The general conclusion of this experience is irrefutable: the democratizing left in the government has capitulated shamefully before Imperialism. Both the PT (Workers Party) of Brazil and the Frente Amplio (Broad Front) of Uruguay reached office through an alliance with the bourgeoisie in the framework of a popular front, which counted on the support of the left worldwide-including especially that extreme left which has a folkloric relationship with Trotskyism. Another even more important conclusion is that popular fronts do not always constitute ‘weak' governments, condemning them to be the midwife of revolutionary crises. On the contrary, in the majority of cases, they end up being an efficient instrument for braking working class struggles, demoralizing the workers and bringing about a popular reflux, especially due to the fact that there does not exist an independent or revolutionary party which combats the popular front. Above and beyond its domestic political function, as occurs in the case of Brazil, Lula´s government has been the principal international tool in the hands of capital with which to combat tendencies towards political radicalization in countries such as Venezuela or Bolivia. On October 17, 2003, a mediating commission formed by Kirchner and Lula intervened before the social and political Bolivian leadership with the aim of having them accept a constitutional succession to the overthrow of Sánchez de Lozada; before that, towards the end of 2002, Lula had piloted the formation of the ‘friends of Venezuela' group of countries, in order to force a mediation between the government and the pro-coup right-wing opposition. The reflux of the Brazilian proletariat, the most important in Latin America, has contained, both geographically and in terms of radicalization, the political awakening of the masses throughout the continent.
In this context, the Venezuelan and Bolivian experiences stand out as a new attempt on the part of Latin American nationalism to conquer national autonomy and turn itself into the exclusive representative of the oppressed masses. What has occurred up till now makes it plain, however, that both the Bolivarian and the Indigenous experiences are to be found historically below what Argentine Peronism and the Bolivian MNR represented in their time, or the Peruvian military government of Velazco Alvarado towards the end of the sixties. The recent nationalizations in the telecommunications and power sectors in Venezuela have compensated the monopolies at market value, which includes installed capital as well as expectations of future earnings. Although the terms of the proposal for a new partnership with the international oil monopolies for the exploitation of the Orinoco basin are not yet known, they are indistinguishable from what has been negotiated in Russia or in Algeria. These are strategic accords for the exploitation of the world market in the conditions created by a huge increase in the prices and therefore in the profits to be obtained from hydrocarbons. In the case of Bolivia the partnership with the oil conglomerates has not been finalized, but in this case the monopolies have reserved the right to register as their own a large part of the reserves and even have the possibility of conditioning contracts to be signed in the future. In Venezuela a huge process of increases in the incomes of the impoverished poor majority of the population is underway, but this does not occur at the cost of capital, or as a result of the modification of the relations between capital and labor, but rather due to the application of enormous amounts of tax revenue. But the recourse to tax revenue has created insurmountable contradictions in the Bolivarian process, made manifest in an ever-increasing rate of inflation, which could disintegrate the social machinery, and in an incredible level of corruption among the Chavista bureaucracy, both civil and military. In the workplace, meanwhile, the dictatorship of capital over labor power continues firmly in place.
Viewed as a whole, the ongoing processes in Bolivia, Venezuela and Ecuador are related to the experiences of the Brazilian and Uruguayan popular fronts in one fundamental aspect: in those countries as well the nationalist style governments have been able to block the revolutionary tendencies of the masses and to attain political stability at the cost of a reflux among the workers. This is what has been occurring over the last two years, in Venezuela since the referendum ratifying Chavez, and in Bolivia since the inauguration of the Constituent Assembly.
As has occurred with all the nationalist movements, ever since they first came into being historically, they make every effort to represent the masses exclusively, which means controlling their organizations. This is what is happening in Venezuela with the official attempt to bring the UNT under state control and with the formation of a single party run from within the state. As the CRFI we declare this to be the fundamental problem facing the exploited working class and we declare ourselves in favor of the total independence of the class of the UNT and in favor of its right to convene free elections in order to designate its leadership bodies. With regard to the single party, we declare it to be a move aimed at regimenting and declare that the socialists should organize their own party. On the basis of a party and press of its own it may be valid to enter the single party in order to develop from within the work of socialist political differentiation. The CMI (Committee for an Marxist International, the Alan Woods-The Militant tendency) and the UIT (to which the Argentine MST belongs), on the other hand, have decided to enter the single party as sustainers of the nationalist process and government, repeating the ill-fated Stalinist experiences dating back to the Chinese Kuomintang of the twenties in the last century. The propaganda published by these tendencies in favor of a ‘permanent revolution' under the leadership of Chávez and the Venezuelan armed forces insults the intelligence.
The CRFI sustains, on the basis of the perspective of new international and financial crises and of the insurmountable contradictions of the present center-left processes, whether nationalist or pro-IMF, the need to prepare for new political convulsions and a radicalization of the popular process, building revolutionary workers parties and working untiringly for the development of working class and peasant organizations and for their political independence. While Imperialism conspires unceasingly in order to reverse the present pre-revolutionary stage, the CRFI warns, in the light of all the historical experience of Latin America, that not one gram of confidence should be placed in the capacity of nationalist governments to protect the peoples from Imperialist conspiracies. Only a firm lack of confidence towards them will unleash the initiatives and the anti-imperialist energies of the masses, chief among them the need to take up arms in order to defeat the permanent conspiracies of Imperialism.
Only a deepening of the Latin American revolution may afford Cuba the possibility of emerging from its social impasse. The entire experience of the Cuban revolution is the sum of failed experiments on the part of its governing bureaucracy, from the extreme zafras (harvests) to the liquidation of the sugar crop; from the mechanical economic subordination to the Russian bureaucracy to the legalization of the dollar. Social differences are on the rise in Cuba, without limit; a minority (among it the bureaucracy) is on the way towards solving its social problems while the majority suffers from enormous want. These social differences form a base of support for restorationist attempts. It is not Kirchner and Lula´s support which will serve as a protective shield against Imperialism or restorationism, or the ALBA, which has no practical concreteness apart from a few accords for the cheap provisioning of oil. Venezuela´s accords with the MERCOSUR have given rise to huge business deals (purchase of the Argentine debt), but have failed as a statement of national autonomy and today is to be found in complete crisis. The defense of Cuba against Imperialism and as an attempt at revolutionary Socialism is linked to the alliance of the workers and peasants of Latin America.