“Chávez is the first love of this nation.”

El Panal is an urban commune in the working-class 23 de Enero Barrio, a neighborhood in Caracas that has long been a stronghold of the Chavista movement. 

Its existence as an organized, revolutionary community predates the revolution. El Panal emerged from the urban guerrilla struggle in the 1960s and 1970s that confronted the system that emerged after the overthrow of Marcos Pérez Jiménez. It became a safe-haven for the guerilla fighters — a status that also made it the subject of violent state repression.  

During our Peace Brigade to Venezuela, Progressive International’s César Caprioli sat down to interview Anacaona Marin, a leading spokesperson for the commune and a member of the Marxist-Leninist Alexis Vive Patriotic Force. 

César Caprioli: What changed in people's lives after the Bolivarian Revolution? When it began, how did life feel different for people—or for you?

Anacaona Marin: I remember the Fourth Republic. I was born in 1989. And I remember when Chávez won in '98. 

Venezuela was in a lull, like an impending pause. It was traditional politics. And I know this because my mom was a political activist. Then she decided to support Chávez...

Chávez was a hurricane — a hurricane that made itself felt and noticed. He came to give voice to the demands of people who wanted change. And he knew how to give it a democratic interpretation. The Bolivarian Revolution was democratic, that is, it was carried out through the ballot box, something that at that time was unprecedented in the world, where armed revolutions were the historical norm.

We were coming from experiences and influences from Latin America, such as the Cuban Revolution and the Sandinista Revolution. That is, different expressions of transformation won through armed struggle. President Chávez himself came from the armed struggle of February 4, 1992, when he attempted to overthrow the Punto Fijo government that existed at the time. Then in ’98, he opted for the political struggle, and people began to participate much more.

There was quite a broad political confidence, and people could talk about what was happening; they could participate in what was happening. Of course, there was a willingness on the part of the State — in this case led by a president who created the material conditions for that to happen.

At that moment Venezuela entered a golden age. People were studying, learning to read and there were people with access to healthcare. In fact, even the middle class became wealthier; that is, it had more opportunities to generate income and benefits than in the past. With Chávez, the divide between rich and poor became a bit more levelled because he gave people the capacity — or the purchasing power — to transform their reality and obtain even the most basic necessities that had been denied to them during the Fourth Republic.

Commander Chávez, for us, in the words of Robert, a fellow coordinator of our organization, is the first love of this nation. Chávez was our first love.

So, we believe that the Bolivarian Revolution, in terms of social justice, was transformative. It improved our livelihoods and then, of course, set a new course, a way of life, a new way of doing things. Commander Chávez, for us, in the words of Robert, a fellow coordinator of our organization, is the first love of this nation. Chávez was our first love.

CC: How did life feel after a few years of Chávez being in power? What changed?

AM: We had access to healthcare — people used to say, “I’m not going to die because I can go to a health clinic right in front of my house.” There were people who learned to read and write. People were able to have decent housing, and people were able to enjoy safety; earlier, that was unthinkable. And there was political participation for everyone, equally.

That participation was fundamental, since it wasn’t someone else who had to speak for you; you had a voice, and you could participate in public governance.

Access to food is also fundamental. I mean, if you ask, “What does a community need?” It is the essentials: healthcare, housing, food, education, recreation, and sports.

I believe that this, materially and substantially, led to the social subject being able to evolve and contemplate other things. You could say, “I can do this for myself.” So right there, you incorporate the political aspect — it’s not someone else coming to do it for you; you are a participant in that process and in that project.

CC: What is the objective of communal organizing efforts? What changes are you effectively seeking to bring about in society?

AM: We believe in a government of the people, in popular government, in the people’s government, through the assembly method and through the transformation of the social relations of production that will generate the necessary material conditions.

That is to say, if you do not empower yourself or exercise real participation in the production of our own needs, in the satisfaction of our own needs, but at the same time generate the economic and financial mechanisms that allow you to create a communal and popular economy, it is a lie, a fallacy. Therefore, we consider that the communes are the necessary political project through which socialism must be developed as a model of society and as an economic model, and that this will allow us to produce our own goods and services, satisfy our own needs, and ensure that, of course, the surplus generated by these means of production is used to satisfy the needs we collectively set for ourselves.

CC: What did you feel when the US and Israel started bombing Iran?

AM: Iran is one of the nations of the world that we came to know — or, more specifically, that I came to know through its strategic alliance with the Bolivarian Revolution. What I remember most about Iran is its leader. I saw him collapse at the coffin of Commander Chávez, weeping for him. And that leader is dead today, killed by the gringos. Imperialism killed him. And that Iranian leader forged the most strategic political alliances with us. Iran sent us tractors so that the peasants could till the land, they sent us water storage tanks so that the Venezuelan fields could be strengthened and become productive.

When they exchanged technology with us to develop our agro-industrial sector, that’s when we got to know Iran.

Then, of course, after the death of Commander Chávez, we saw a great deal of solidarity from the Iranian government, because we saw them as a moral and ethical power in the face of imperialist aggression. So we found common ground in the anti-imperialist struggle.

We respect their way of life, their culture, their approach, and their worldview.  When, in 2019 and 2020, the U.S. empire, through blockade and sanctions, tried to create a crisis within our country to make Venezuela explode by depriving it of gasoline, immediately, without hesitation, without a shred of cowardice, Iran sent ships with gasoline.

It was the fundamental factor that prevented upheaval in the country at that moment, wasn’t it? And when we saw those ships coming, my reaction was: Damn, they actually dared! They did it! And seeing today how Iranian people resist imperial cowardice and betrayal, it obviously does cause turmoil for the Venezuelans, because we know that our worst sin is having oil, for standing up to imperialism and saying that we will not be their lackeys nor their subjects, just like Iran.

They’ve prepared for this; they must resist, they must act in accordance with their conscience, their will, their resistance, their legitimate right to defend themselves… We believe that in the face of barbarism, the people’s legitimate defence must prevail.

CC: What is the significance of 3 January, and how can we understand the role of the communes in this new context of aggression?

AM: We believe that what Venezuela is experiencing today requires great intelligence, great strategic patience — as some comrades say — and firm confidence in the leadership of our Bolivarian Revolution, and in the political-military high command. 

Of course, this is not the first time we have been attacked, only this time it was with bombs,  which were massive, lethal and devastating. Honor and glory to the more than 100 victims killed in the imperial siege and the imperial attack and the brave Cuban comrades who fell as martyrs in this vile attack. 

We have been an “unusual threat” since 2015 and as a result have faced sanctions and blockades. This time, we indeed face a bigger threat because we know the bombs are more lethal, and we need to maneuver. So we call on everyone to do their part, each to their own. Our acting president, Comrade Delcy, has our full confidence. And we understand that it is up to her to do what she must. 

What is our role?

Self-critically, we must assume our leading role and understand that while she fights the diplomatic battle for peace, in the necessary and just struggle for the return of our President who was kidnapped, and in deepening the revolution, the Venezuelan people organized in communes must do the same: they must mobilize, they must raise awareness, they must actively participate in the process of communalization, in our revolutionary process.

That is how we will become much stronger and imperialism less invincible. Here is something a bit complicated for imperialism, and that is they have not found the formula to chip away at the revolutionary consciousness. They have not been able to, and they will not be able to. They have sought revolt, they have sought to generate civil war. They made us starve! From 2014 to 2017, they made the Venezuelan people suffer from hunger and misery. The Venezuelan people resisted this, and all they had left were bombs. And of course, we are not equals in the fight and in the military confrontation, but we know that in the diplomacy of peace, we will be victorious, and that each person should dedicate themselves to doing their part in the political struggle.

CC: What is the meaning of Bolívar for the Venezuelan people? And how has Chávez managed to carry his legacy to the present?

AM: Look, it is no small thing that our Liberator Simón Bolívar was born in Caracas, Venezuela. That creates a great sense of commitment and moral ethic. For us, he is our role model, the father of the nation. Bolívar, a man of his time, tried to do so much; he gave us political independence.

And we understand that at that time, with his three republican processes, he grasped important social aspects necessary to bring about the economic transformation needed then. The times did not allow it. And I believe that is the Bolívar that Chávez champions, because he understands history not in a linear way, but rather in a substantive way — and through this substance, Chávez brings us to Bolívar — not the omnipotent one, not the military man, not the invincible or glorified one, nor the bourgeois and classist figure of his time.

But rather, he brings us Bolívar the thinker, the political Bolívar, the Bolívar of Gran Colombia, the Bolívar who met with Petión, Bolívar, the illustrious son — the politically mentee — of Simón Rodríguez. The Bolívar who understood that social revolution was necessary and that his army was composed of peasants, Black men and women. That was the Bolívar that Chávez brought to mind and whom he recovered. And I believe that it goes beyond nationalism... Bolívar was not a nationalist. His was the Bolivarian doctrine: the need for the great homeland and the consolidation of a Latin America of brother and sister nations, with a shared history, a shared identity. So the Bolivarian legacy within us is immersed in the logic of the Communal Federation [1]. 

You ask me: “How do you connect Bolivarianism with the current proposal?” It is there, in the Communal Federation, in the nation of nations, in the need for us — within the framework of what we aspire to, for the communes to be the social subject that breaks into a new national or global political logic.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

[1] The Communal Federation is a structure that supports national-level coordination for the country’s Communal Councils. It forms part of a vision of gradually transferring governance to the grassroots through the communal system.