Kenneth T. Tellis: Is the Venezuelan Bolivarian Revolution in danger from unseen forces?
VHeadline commentarist Kenneth T. Tellis writes: A recent conversation got me thinking of how groups that claim to be part of a movement infiltrate and take over that movement for personal power or to destroy that movement from inside, without anyone being the wiser for it, because in power politics such has been possible throughout the ages.
There seems to be groups that do not let honest people from entering into discussions with the very leaders, because they control the very access to contacts with those in high offices.
This as we know is the age of counterfeit patriots, where those who while posing as real patriots damage a revolution from inside, unbeknownst to those who think that they are serving the cause.
The danger here is the trust that has been put into the hands of these counterfeit patriots who are bent on destroying the Bolivarian Revolution, by undermining it, and making its leaders look like failures.
Thus it now becomes very necessary to purge from the ranks these pseudo-patriots in order to save the Bolivarian Revolution from complete internal collapse.
Of course, it may be that some are only playing power politics, to keep the power for themselves and for no other purpose ... but they are no less a danger to the movement even if they are not counterfeit patriots, who are working for a foreign power to undo the Bolivarian Revolution itself, because they will ultimately weaken it.
True patriots never have personal power or gain in mind and are quite wiling to sacrifice anything for the cause.
If there are Venezuelans with this thought in mind, they will serve the cause of the revolution without a murmur, because they are dedicated and loyal to the people no matter what. We must therefore keep in mind the differences in the thoughts or the various groups who are part of the Bolivarian Revolution ... but at the same we must be wary at those who are in the pay of a foreign power and work for the ultimate destruction of the revolution that was to bring the Venezuelan people a new and democratic way of life, where socialism brought not justice alone, but the fruits of a new order dedicated to creating a new and egalitarian society under the banner of Bolivarian Socialism.
Your comment "True patriots never have personal power or gain in mind and are quite willing to sacrifice anything for the cause." reminds me of conversation between Socrates and Thrasymachus on the nature of art. To paraphrase Socrates, the true artist thinks only of his subject, hence in the art of politics the true politician thinks only of the citizen.
However, Socrates also notes that one may practice many arts at the same time. In your context this politician must also engage in the art of finding food (i.e. making money) which in a political setting means ensuring their careers to provide for themselves and their families.
This inevitably leads to conflicts of interest because, until you find a true patriot that has no family and doesn’t need to eat, you will always have politicians who at some point must think of themselves first and the people second. This is one of the great theoretical problems for socialism as an ideology.
Not knowing the precise identity of the "counterfeit patriots" of whom you speak, I can't say for sure, but perhaps they are concerned about the long-term success of a movement that is, as I understand it, based on a limited supply of petroleum. If the system isn’t working now, how will it survive when the oil runs out?
These types of questions might lead an independent thinker to conclude that change is necessary. If this independent thinking is "unpatriotic" it may be that the revolution is more concerned with staying in power than with helping the ordinary Venezuelans find enough to eat.
I would also be interested to read your response to Francisco Rodriguez's article in Foreign Affairs, "An empty revolution."
Your comment "True patriots never have personal power or gain in mind and are quite willing to sacrifice anything for the cause." reminds me of conversation between Socrates and Thrasymachus on the nature of art. To paraphrase Socrates, the true artist thinks only of his subject, hence in the art of politics the true politician thinks only of the citizen.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Socrates also notes that one may practice many arts at the same time. In your context this politician must also engage in the art of finding food (i.e. making money) which in a political setting means ensuring their careers to provide for themselves and their families.
This inevitably leads to conflicts of interest because, until you find a true patriot that has no family and doesn’t need to eat, you will always have politicians who at some point must think of themselves first and the people second. This is one of the great theoretical problems for socialism as an ideology.
Not knowing the precise identity of the "counterfeit patriots" of whom you speak, I can't say for sure, but perhaps they are concerned about the long-term success of a movement that is, as I understand it, based on a limited supply of petroleum. If the system isn’t working now, how will it survive when the oil runs out?
These types of questions might lead an independent thinker to conclude that change is necessary. If this independent thinking is "unpatriotic" it may be that the revolution is more concerned with staying in power than with helping the ordinary Venezuelans find enough to eat.
I would also be interested to read your response to Francisco Rodriguez's article in Foreign Affairs, "An empty revolution."
Nathan Gill
www.southernaffairs.org