The concept of people must be considered and specified; nowadays it is cause of confusion and it is the base of plenty non-sense mistakes. The “squalid” invoke the nation, as well as the Revolutionaries. Anyone can stand in a corner and shout saying that they are talking in the name of people or when there is a tailback and anyone shouts out loud claiming that is talking on behalf of the people. That tailback is made it for a small demand: people are talking. And those cars and trucks that are stuck on the road are not the people.
People support the Government but they also fight it; in April people went out to fight, but they voted for “squalid” mayors and governors...People, people.
There is no doubt about it, this concept demands some reflexion. We owe to the people our Revolutionaries. But, how can we lead us during confusion? How do we know where is it and where doesn't? How do we know which one is it and which one isn't? Lets us think about it.
A woman scolds Commander Chávez and asks him to solve her individual problems, running the needs of her town over and her society. Is that the people?
In the town in front of where she lives, another woman who belongs to a PSUV’s patrol, who attends the meetings, who quotes and discusses in her patrol, who claims for the problems of her people without shrillness and without harming the Revolutionary strategy. Is that the people?
The oil workers organized in unions and the lazy individualist workers who only think about their miserable life, they are the people too.
How to solve this tangled mess? Why is there confusion? We anticipate that around this concept there are going round some ideologies.
The diffuse, vague and polysemous concept hides the class struggles, and even worse, it does ignorance honor; while it is more ignorant more people is.
When someone studies and becomes aware, then, according to this diffuse concept, he/she is no longer people. The counter-revolutionary people deprive of vanguard the popular struggles. This strategy is characteristic of the Social Democracy, which made ignorance a virtue.
Precisely, whatever is disorganized, unconscious, individualistic and selfish would be a colonized town by the ideology of domination, an easy prey to oligarch manipulations, a nation to the service of Capitalism. It will be the same people that Bolivar talked about, "they have abused of your credulity" or "an ignorant nation becomes an unconscious instrument of its own destruction". To this people belongs the individualist lady from the first example.
In contrast, when it is organized, conscience, studious, altruistic and disciplined, it will be a nation opposed to the ideology of liberation, willing to do anything to defend Socialism, which is its only hope. People who understand the tactical problems will never put above of this strategy. It will be the people at the service of Socialism. This is the people that accompanied Bolivar to “El Paso de los Andes”.
To confuse, to put in one bag the two people, to give them the same prestige, the same treatment is to condemn the dominated to infinite domination. Revolutionary is to organized it and make it conscious. That is the central task of Revolution: to consolidate on the shoulders of the conscious, free and organized people. The other is an unconscious instrument of counter-revolution.
With Chávez all, without him nothing!
No comments:
Post a Comment