Making sense of Venezuela’s presidential elections

Anderson Bean: To give some context, can you begin by giving a brief description of the social and economic crisis in Venezuela leading up to the election?

Gustavo Martinez: Everyone discusses the social and economic crisis in Venezuela. Political actors, both domestically and internationally, address the crisis, but they rarely specify who truly suffers its consequences. I want to focus on the crisis from my perspective as a worker. I experience the crisis firsthand because I am part of the working class. From this perspective, I can say that workers in Venezuela, for years, have been enduring an official minimum wage of less than four dollars a month.

In 2018, the government issued Memorandum 2792, an anti-worker document that greatly benefited employers and the capitalist class. This memorandum essentially nullified established rights and labor protections enshrined in both the Constitution and the Organic Labor Law. It dismissed all collective bargaining agreements nationwide, eliminated the right to strike, and allowed employers to unilaterally change labor conditions and terminate workers at will. The Constitution and the Organic Labor Law no longer govern labor relations between workers and employers; instead, Memorandum 2792, issued by the government, applies to both the public and private sectors.

Workers also lack social benefits that match the real cost of living because we receive bonuses that do not affect our wages. There are various issues with these bonuses. For instance, if you work for a company for 20, 25, or even 30 years, upon leaving, retiring, or being fired, the calculation of your benefits for all those years will be based on less than four dollars a month.

Unfortunately, there have been no labor or social struggles for a considerable time, even before the elections. This is due to the government’s relentless and brutal repression of the working class and its organizational efforts. For example, union elections can no longer occur unless permitted by the government and supported by bureaucratic structures like the Bolivarian Socialist Workers Central (the CBST, a government-aligned union).

For years, there has been persecution of union leaders, workers’ leaders who tried to fight, and workers who raised their voices. Venezuelan prisons are filled with these union and worker leaders. We also know that political leaders are imprisoned and detained due to the government’s disputes with the right-wing opposition. International organizations report more frequently on imprisoned and persecuted right-wing opposition representatives but pay little attention to the number of workers and leftists who have been persecuted and imprisoned for trying to claim their rights.

Another factor of the crisis that cannot be ignored is the sanctions. The imperialist sanctions against Venezuela have exacerbated an already unbearable crisis for the Venezuelan people. In this context, we firmly reject this interventionist tactic of blackmail and pressure employed by the United States against the Venezuelan government, which is supported by right-wing opposition figures in our country, such as Juan Guaidó and María Corina Machado. We want to make clear that rejecting these sanctions does not equate to supporting the Maduro government. Our stance comes from a class perspective, reflecting how these sanctions worsen our living conditions.

Meanwhile, the government has been promoting the idea of Venezuela’s economic recovery, a narrative supported by Fedecámeras, the country’s main chamber of commerce. Although economic indicators are improving, this progress has come at the expense of the working class. Workers in Venezuela are subjected to conditions resembling semi-slavery. The government uses this alleged recovery to attract foreign investment, offering extremely low wages and various incentives and guarantees for international capital. They fail to mention that these improvements are based on the exploitation of workers. As a result, Venezuelans, including workers, popular sectors, youth, and the general population, are living in impoverished conditions. This was the backdrop for the July 28 elections.

AB: In the July 28 elections there were ten candidates, but only two that had a real chance of winning. How would you characterize the two main candidates, the incumbent Nicolas Maduro, and his main challenger the right-wing Edmundo Gonzalez?

GM: Nicolás Maduro is the government’s candidate. From the perspective of Marea Socialista, we characterize Maduro’s government as anti-worker, anti-popular, anti-democratic, authoritarian, and fundamentally capitalist. Despite his rhetoric of being revolutionary and socialist, his policies clearly contradict these claims. His administration has implemented severe adjustments on workers and the population, unprecedented in Venezuela’s history. This defines Nicolás Maduro’s candidacy. When we label it an anti-democratic and authoritarian government, this is what we mean.

To prepare for these elections, the Maduro government banned political organizations, took over certain political parties from both the right and the Left, and disqualified candidates. Essentially, the candidates who were allowed to participate in the July 28 elections were those the government permitted. For example, Edmundo González Urrutia became the candidate for the right-wing coalition the Unitary Platform after María Corina Machado and Corina Lloris were both disqualified. González, the main candidate of the right-wing opposition, is equally authoritarian and anti-democratic, representing the most right-wing sector in Venezuela—a concentrated business group with international ties to Western powers.

Machado, the primary figure behind González’s candidacy, is a staunch Zionist who supports Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Therefore, the far-right in González and Machado does not offer a genuine alternative for workers, the popular sectors, or those enduring the crisis in Venezuela. Machado and González are also involved in corruption. Machado does not address the illegitimate foreign debt, the government’s anti-worker labor policy, or the exploitation of mines in the Orinoco. Her sector, the traditional bourgeoisie, has greatly benefited from Maduro’s labor policy.

Machado does not challenge Maduro’s anti-worker program because their conflict is not about policy differences but about who controls the government and their international relations and geopolitical alliances. Essentially, we are looking at two right-wing candidates, both anti-worker and both enemies of the working class.

AB: Before we talk about the events on Election Day, I want to first talk about the lead-up to the election. Much of the mainstream news has reported on the repression of several right-wing opposition candidates, but little has been said about Maduro’s repression of his critics on the Left. Can you speak on the repression of both right and left-wing candidates and parties leading up to the election? Was the banning of any of these candidates or parties justified?

GM: When we describe Maduro’s government as right-wing, it is because it is evident that Maduro’s administration has launched a campaign against the Left in Venezuela, particularly against the anti-capitalist Left. It should be remembered that this crusade is not a recent development; it has been ongoing for a long time.
For example, in 2015, the first anti-capitalist organization to be banned in Venezuela was Marea Socialista when we attempted to legalize ourselves but were denied. Throughout these years, the government has taken control of various party leaderships, both right and Left, but the most significant conflict has been against the Left.

There are emblematic examples, such as what the Maduro government did to the leadership of the PPT (Patria Para Todos), and more recently, in 2023, to the Communist Party of Venezuela (PCV). When the PCV, who long supported Maduro, broke with the government in 2020, the Maduro government responded by raiding their headquarters and arresting several of their supporters. Then Maduro, through the TSJ [Supreme Tribunal of Justice, Venezuela’s highest court – Eds.], made the PCV illegal and revoked their electoral card, preventing them from participating in the 2024 elections. The PCV was the last remaining leftist party with an electoral card. This action effectively banned all leftist parties from the elections. Maduro also requested that the TSJ impose a new transitional board of directors on the PCV. The individuals appointed to this ad-hoc board are not even members of the party and are, of course, Maduro loyalists.

This action highlights the repressive nature of Maduro’s administration. María Corina Machado and her party, along with other right-wing sectors, remain silent about these attacks on left-wing political organizations. The Left more broadly has faced accusations, persecution, and demonization, with a constant campaign on social media and threats from television programs targeting groups like Marea Socialista and others.

Despite the Left’s attempts to participate in elections, they encountered numerous obstacles from the CNE [National Electoral Council- Eds.] and the Supreme Court of Justice. The Maduro government made sure that the Left did not have a candidate in the elections. This repression underscores the anti-democratic, anti-popular, and authoritarian nature of the regime, which actively persecutes the Left in Venezuela.

AB: Several independent Left groups including Marea Socialista, Socialism and Freedom Party (PSL), Worker’s League for Socialism (LTS), and Fatherland For an All-Popular Revolutionary Alliance (PPT-APR) led a campaign called “The Working Class Does Not Have a Candidate,” can you speak about this campaign, and why it was important to not lend support to any of the ten candidates running.

GM: We, as Marea Socialista, have been involved in various efforts and struggles concerning both trade union and political issues. Since last year, we have participated in a political coalition called the National Meeting in Defense of the Rights of the People. This coalition, along with other organizations, supported the campaign “The Working Class Does Not Have a Candidate.” The coalition includes groups like the PCV and the Popular Alternative Movement, among others. We attempted to run a joint electoral campaign, but it was not possible, partly because the PCV ultimately decided to support the candidacy of former CNE rector, Enrique Márquez.

We did not support Marquez because, like the rest of the candidates, he did not represent the interests of the working class. So we, alongside four other independent Left organizations (PSL, LTS, PPT-APR), launched the campaign “The Working Class Does Not Have a Candidate.” All the candidates present on the ballot were those permitted by the government and none of them had a program aimed at even the minimum improvement of the population’s living conditions. None of them offered any solutions to the crisis. In this scenario, it was important to show a campaign that, although it did not have a candidate, denounced the fact that we could not register a candidate, but also because we were preparing for the post-election period.

In our campaign, we emphasize that we must prepare for the struggle, focus on revitalizing the working class, and support the strengthening of the Venezuelan workers’ movement. We aim for the Venezuelan Left to progress towards unity and consolidation, based on a program of struggle that genuinely addresses the interests of workers and affected sectors.

In other words, none of the candidates, regardless of the outcome on the 28, would have resolved the crisis, and the crisis will persist. It is within this context that we, who have supported the campaign “The Working Class Does Not Have a Candidate,” aim to advocate and propose programs of struggle. Our focus includes fundamental issues such as salaries in accordance with Article 91 of the constitution, the freedom of imprisoned workers, democratic freedoms, among many other demands.

AB: Both Maduro’s right and left-wing oppositions have claimed that there was fraud on Election Day. What is your take on these charges?

GM: From the perspective of Marea Socialista, the mood and disposition observed on the streets among the majority of the people do not align with the results presented by the CNE. Consequently, we believe these results are highly questionable. To truly understand what happened, a public and citizen-led audit, independent of both the government and the opposition led by María Corina Machado, is necessary. We do not trust the CNE, nor do we place blind faith in the results provided by María Corina Machado. We defend the people’s right to know what truly happened on July 28. We recognize and respect the protests that occurred in the first few days following the announcement and believe it is fundamental to demand transparency and verification of that day’s events.

AB: After the election results were released thousands of Venezuelans flooded the streets, many of which were claiming fraud. Can you speak to the character of these protests, who made up these protests, to what extent are they organized, who organized them, what are their dynamics, what are their demands?

GM: We believe that on July 28, rather than fully supporting the candidacy of Edmundo González Urrutia as the majority choice, people went to express their discontent with the Maduro government and the urgent need to remove such a government. Once the CNE announced the results, thousands of people in Caracas and other parts of the country took to the streets, feeling deceived and robbed. These demonstrations were, in general, spontaneous, without any prior organization or preparation. They were not even driven or promoted by María Corina Machado; in fact, Machado contained them. Machado’s initial statements were directed at the military, urging calm and not pushing or promoting the street protests. This is one of the reasons why the protests have not continued. These protests were primarily from popular and neighborhood sectors, where Chavismo once had significant support. People in these areas, through their statements and social media posts, assert that the government was defeated.

AB: How has the government responded to these protests?

GM: The government has reacted to the protests with increased authoritarianism and repression, utilizing the police, military, and armed civilian groups. The government admits to arresting thousands of young people. Although the protests have diminished in intensity and are no longer prominent in the streets, the government continues to conduct operations in popular neighborhoods, going house to house, conducting raids, and treating everyone with suspicion. They inspect people’s phones and homes, and these actions are ongoing. This must be condemned and brought to light.

AB: What specifically are organizations like Marea Socialista, and others on the critical Left demanding in light of the elections and what has transpired since?

GM: For Marea Socialista, regarding the events of July 28, we believe that to truly understand what happened, an audit needs to be conducted. This audit should involve recognized personalities from various fields and should include organized workers. It must be completely independent of both the government and the opposition. Additionally, we have stated that none of the presented candidacies offer a real chance for recovery. We believe that regaining any lost rights will depend on the ability of the working class, popular sectors, youth, and the general population to organize and fight. We must focus on our own organization and not rely on candidates or political directions that do not align with the working class.

Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see “About Tempest Collective.”

Featured Image Credits: Photo by A. Davey and photo by Kremlin.RU; modified by Tempest.