President Nicolas Maduro has announced the restructuring of the pro-government Great Patriotic Pole coalition, arguing the bloc should achieve “grassroots revolutionary hegemony” in Venezuelan politics.
In October 2012 Venezuela faced a choice: whether to deepen the Bolivarian Revolution that under the leadership of Hugo Chavez, has brought dignity, health, education and hope - or to return to a brutal, unequal, neo-liberal society where oil wealth lined the pockets of multinational companies and Venezuelan elite. The people of Venezuela who voted for Chavez, voted to fight for socialism.
By Nicolas Maduro, Víctor Ríos, Miguel Riera, Sep 26th 2013
In this interview translated by Venezuelanalysis.com, El Viejo Topo journalists talk with Nicolas Maduro about his life, political formation, and the long story of how he got to know Chavez and then fought alongside him, before he was elected president until he died.
The author of We Created Chávez: A People's History of the Venezuelan Revolution, George Ciccariello-Maher, spoke to Samuel Grove about the historical background to Venezuela's Bolivarian Revolution, the interventions of the popular masses that propelled Hugo Chávez to the presidency and the results and aftermath of Venezuela’s first election since Chávez's death in March
When Hugo Chavez, Venezuela’s iconic and charismatic president, died from cancer earlier this year, one question was uppermost in the minds of his supporters, his opponents and the wider world.Would his Bolivarian revolution die with him or had his 15 years in power so fundamentally changed the country that his legacy would be secure - regardless of who was chosen as his successor?
Following last month's elections, the legacy of Hugo Chávez was raked over the coals one last time, but the same old stats on poverty, inflation, and crime miss the real story.
As a careful examination of the language and coverage of nearly four years of New York Times articles reveals, concern for freedom and democracy in Latin America has not been an honest concern for the liberal media institution.
While one can applaud Jon Lee Anderson for finally acknowledging the value of social indicators and statistical data, he and his magazine cannot be allowed to define “social inequality” any way they see fit.
