Skip to content

Venezuela the imperialist coup loses momentum and the government goes on the off

Marxist Theory · 2019-04-30

Core Argument

The article argues that the imperialist-backed coup against the Maduro government in Venezuela had entered a phase of stagnation by early April 2019, with the opposition losing momentum and internal divisions resurfacing, while the government began a tentative, defensive counter-offensive. However, the central claim is that neither side offers a solution for the Venezuelan working class and poor. The government's reliance on negotiation with imperialism, liberal economic measures to stabilise hyperinflation, and bureaucratic management of the electricity and water crisis — rather than revolutionary mobilisation and expropriation of the bourgeoisie — means the people continue to bear the weight of the crisis. The only genuine way forward, the article contends, is for the working class to build an independent revolutionary organisation capable of taking power, expropriating the bourgeoisie, and establishing workers' democratic control over the economy.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis is grounded in the classical Marxist tradition of permanent revolution and the critique of bourgeois nationalism within anti-imperialist struggles. It draws on Lenin's theory of the state — the argument that the bourgeois state apparatus cannot be reformed but must be smashed and replaced by a new form of workers' power. The article's insistence that the government's defensive posture and hidden negotiations with the right constitute a betrayal of the revolution echoes Trotsky's analysis of the degeneration of workers' states and the need for political revolution against bureaucratic layers that block the revolutionary potential of the masses.

The piece also deploys the Marxist method of class analysis to dissect the opposition: its discourse of "we are the 90 percent" is exposed as a self-serving fiction that led it to miscalculate military support. The opposition's calls for foreign intervention are analysed as a symptom of its lack of organic connection to the Venezuelan people — its leaders live abroad and would shield themselves from the consequences of imperialist aggression. This is a concrete application of the Marxist insight that the bourgeoisie, when unable to maintain its rule through its own social forces, will turn to imperialism as a crutch.

The article's rejection of reformism is explicit: the government's liberalisation of the exchange rate and strangling of purchasing power to stabilise prices is condemned as placing the crisis on workers' shoulders rather than advancing towards expropriation. This positions the analysis within the tradition of revolutionary Marxism as opposed to both Stalinist bureaucratic nationalism and social-democratic reformism.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article was written in the immediate aftermath of the failed 30 April 2019 military uprising led by Juan Guaidó, and its analysis is tightly bound to that conjuncture. The key empirical claims are:

  • The opposition's mobilisations had diminished after successive failures to split the armed forces or bring in "humanitarian aid" (which the article notes a New York Times investigation confirmed was set on fire by Guaidó's own followers).
  • The most radical wing of the opposition, led by María Corina Machado, was pushing for foreign military intervention under Article 187 of the constitution, but was rebuffed by Elliot Abrams, who called such a request "premature" — revealing a tension between the opposition's desperation and US imperialism's strategic caution.
  • Brazil's Bolsonaro, despite his rhetorical support, had been blocked by his own defence minister and vice-president from committing to military intervention.
  • The government's response was defensive: Maduro called for dialogue with Trump, relied on Russian military personnel and Chinese aid to demonstrate international support, and took cautious legal steps against Guaidó (disqualification from office, lifting of parliamentary immunity) while waiting for the US reaction at each step.
  • The economic crisis continued to deepen: hyperinflation exceeded one million per cent, the government's stabilisation measures were liberal rather than revolutionary, and the electricity and water crises — partly caused by imperialist sabotage but also by years of corruption and lack of maintenance — were being managed through rationing that condemned the interior of the country to endless blackouts while sparing Caracas.

The article's conjunctural relevance lies in its insistence that the crisis is not merely a matter of imperialist aggression versus a besieged government, but a crisis of revolutionary leadership. The government's failure to arm popular militias, expropriate the bourgeoisie, or establish workers' control over ministries and public services means that even if the coup is defeated, the conditions that produced it — corruption, economic collapse, bureaucratic degeneration — will remain.

Where the Argument Continues

The article is a snapshot of a specific moment in the Venezuelan crisis, and its argument continues in several directions within the IDOM corpus:

  • Jorge Martin's analysis of the economic measures: The article quotes a tweet from Jorge Martin criticising the government's monetarist adjustment. This connects to broader IDOM analyses of the government's economic policy as a form of "socialism for the rich" — stabilising the currency by crushing workers' purchasing power rather than expropriating capital.
  • The question of workers' control and militias: The article's call for arming popular militias and establishing workers' control over workplaces and ministries is a recurring theme in IDOM's coverage of Venezuela, developed in articles on the need for a workers' government and the critique of the PSUV bureaucracy.
  • The critique of the "fifth column" within Chavismo: The article's reference to "the fifth column that is betraying the Bolivarian Revolution from within" points to a broader analysis of the bureaucratic layer that has enriched itself while the masses suffer — a theme taken up in IDOM articles on corruption and the need for a political revolution within the Venezuelan state.
  • The international dimension: The article's discussion of the Lima Group, Russian and Chinese aid, and US sanctions connects to IDOM's broader analysis of interimperialist rivalry and the role of Russia and China as counterweights to US imperialism — but also as forces that stabilise the Venezuelan bourgeoisie rather than advance socialist revolution.

Connections

  • Trotsky's The Revolution Betrayed: The article's analysis of a bureaucratic layer that blocks revolutionary mobilisation while the masses suffer is a direct application of Trotsky's theory of the degeneration of workers' states.
  • Lenin's State and Revolution: The call to smash the bourgeois state apparatus and build workers' power is grounded in Lenin's text.
  • IDOM's broader Venezuela coverage: Articles on the 2017 protests, the 2018 election, and the 2020 parliamentary elections develop the same themes of the need for a revolutionary alternative to both Guaidó and the Maduro government.
  • Against the Stream episodes: The podcast has covered Venezuela extensively, often interviewing Jorge Martin and other IDOM analysts on the ground, providing updates on the economic crisis, the state of the opposition, and the government's response.
  • The New York Times investigation referenced in the article (on the burning of humanitarian aid) is a useful empirical source for readers who want to verify the article's claims about imperialist sabotage.

Key Quotes

  1. "The coup in Venezuela is stagnating. The opposition is losing momentum and internal divisions are resurfacing."

  2. "The stabilisation of the exchange rate was achieved by liberalising it, and the stabilisation of prices was achieved by strangling the purchasing power."

  3. "All these measures made within the framework of capitalism end up placing the weight of the crisis on the shoulders of the workers instead of advancing definitively towards the expropriation and the setting in motion of an economy under workers' democratic control."

  4. "The government is not considering using the revolutionary potential of the people to solve the electricity and water debacle through self-organisation, nor to face the coup d'état."

  5. "A true solution to the crisis will only be achieved by the people. It will not be the Russians or the Chinese who maintain stability in the country for the benefit of Venezuela's sovereign interests."

  6. "Our call is for an organisation with autonomy and class independence, for the defence of the interests of the great majority of workers and youth. For the struggle to promote the building of a revolutionary alternative that will confront imperialism, the bourgeoisie, its right-wing puppets, and also the fifth column that is betraying the Bolivarian Revolution from within."