The pro-Maduro left’s blind spots: Against the ‘nuancing’ of Venezuela’s disaster
Aplaneta
Steve Ellner’s article, “‘Neoliberal and authoritarian’? A simplistic analysis of the Maduro government that leaves much unsaid,” written in response to Gabriel Hetland’s piece “Capitalism and authoritarianism in Maduro’s Venezuela” and published at LINKS International Journal of Socialist Renewal, provides an opportunity to continue and deepen an important debate about Venezuela’s current political situation and the direction of the Bolivarian government. I want to weigh in on this debate, primarily to respond to several of Ellner’s arguments.
In my view, his piece attempts to dampen or minimise criticisms of the increasingly authoritarian and regressive course taken by the Venezuelan political system under Nicolás Maduro. His defence of the Maduro government also reflects a broader problem among some sectors of the left: a tendency to remain tied to decaying regimes, while lacking any ideas and imagination to chart out alternative paths that are both critical and rooted in popular struggles. Such political clarity is urgently needed in a world where far-right movements and authoritarianism are gaining ground.
Ellner’s central argument is that criticism of Maduro should be more contextualised and nuanced, and that greater rigour is needed. However, his article simply amounts to a series of so-called “nuances” to Hetland’s arguments that, in effect, justify Maduro’s repression of workers, destruction of wages and implementation of a highly aggressive neoliberal regime. Paradoxically, Ellner’s own arguments lack nuance. He makes glaring omissions on issues that are essential to any analysis seeking to avoid simplistic binaries, especially one grounded in solidarity with popular struggles. In the end, Ellner falls into the very trap he criticises. As for rigour, it is worth noting Ellner often fails to provide any of the data he demands of Hetland. In some cases, his sources are no more than statements from Venezuelan government officials. For this reason, it remains necessary to carry out the work of critical nuance that Ellner claims to value — but unfortunately does not practice.