Deception in the Promise of 'Uncharged Voting'

Rewritten Article:

In a casual chat on a late-night talk show, Hillary Clinton suggested US voters should "move past themselves" and opt between Biden and Trump in this year's presidential election. Her smirk, arrogance, and offhand attitude echoed the callousness shown by psychopaths on crime dramas. Her dismissive demeanor towards the electorate reminds us of Biden, the way he brushed aside questions about Israel's slaughter of kids in Gaza while enjoying an ice cream cone.

Honestly speaking, Hillary was spot on. There's no reason to care about either Biden or Trump since they both belong to the same ruling political and economic establishment. They work for corporate interests, are pro-Zionists, and share an ardent love for choking countries with murderous sanctions like Cuba and Venezuela.

The US "democracy" has always been a mirage, a facade for the elite's bipartisan domination. They've been using it as a tool to maintain corporate greed, snuff out any opposition, and dictate things worldwide. Hillary's comments served as a reminder of the city's indifference towards democracy and personal freedom, both in the US and abroad. They use "democracy" only as a vehicle for their neo-colonial agenda.

For over two decades, Venezuela has been a target of their "free elections" mantra, coupled with regime change operations and economic sanctions. The result? A trail of chaos and destruction. How does the US keep selling us the "free elections" lie? With the backing of the complacent corporate media. Double-cross, another emotion psychopaths lack.

For years, we've heard the same lie repeated time and again: the 2018 presidential election was a sham because the US-backed opposition declined to participate. However, anti-Chavista candidates still ran and achieved a considerable number of votes. The election was preceded by US financial sanctions targeting Venezuela's oil industry, designed to create economic instability and drive people towards ousting Maduro.

When this strategy failed, more economic sanctions rained down, in the form of a full-fledged blockade, while the media joined forces to conjure more lies. An example? The New York Times claimed the upcoming July 28 presidential vote was happening because of an "commitment [made by Caracas] to the United States to hold elections this year in exchange for a lifting of crippling economic sanctions."

There's plenty to dissect in that brief statement.

The dialogue process and electoral agreement signed between Caracas and the US-backed opposition in Barbados was meant to guide the opposition away from violent fascism and towards the electoral path. Presidential elections were constitutionally mandated for 2024, irrespective of the dialogue or the opposition's participation.

Although the government and every human rights expert/organization has pleaded for the lifting of sanctions, the relaxation was not the result of the Barbados Agreement. It was a consequence of a migratory wave that returned home after years of economic aggression against Venezuela. Furthermore, Washington's wishes have always been influenced by corporations like Chevron, who want to recover debt from their Venezuelan joint ventures.

The "crippling economic sanctions" were not lifted, only the energy and gold sectors' measures were suspended for six months. As that period has now concluded, Venezuela is again threatened with the reimposition of all sanctions because "elections are not 'free.'"

This time, the "free elections" campaigners zero in on María Corina Machado's "ban" on running for office. The propaganda suggests that people are taking to the streets demanding this wealthy, sanctions-obsessed Venezuelan heiress be permitted to run. However, the truth is far from it. Then why does she figure so prominently in Western liberal elections as a crucial factor for "free" elections?

First, she embodies the elite that guarantees two things: US economic interests and the eradication of popular power that demonstrates socialism's feasibility. It comes as no surprise that Washington supports Machado, but it's surprising to see the Latin American left or even the Venezuelan left that opposes Maduro backing her political rights over others'.

Are we expected to pretend we live in a classless society? For decades, and even centuries, the wealthy class has barred the working class from political power. This was the case in Venezuela until Hugo Chávez arrived, and the wretched of the earth finally got a taste of and began transforming power.

From my perspective, nobody like Machado should ever be allowed to run for office, especially when they declare their intent to annihilate a grassroots force like Chavismo. She has openly called for a foreign invasion of Venezuela. Is it fair to sanction fascists and oligarchs while they preach hate speech, create divisions, and target the poor, peripheralized, and leftist communities for their own gain?

Don't we learn from history how the far-right employs hate speech and "othering" to rally support, make false promises, and manipulate people into making their countries US vassal states once more? Look at the recent painful examples of Ecuador and Argentina. It seems to me that being a country targeted by US imperialism and resisting is still better than being a US neo-colony with no dignity.

Some may argue, "But democracy means all political options should run, and people can choose freely." Venezuela is doing precisely that. There are 13 candidates, and 12 of them oppose Maduro. They come in all shapes and sizes, from free-market lovers, religious conservatives, businessmen, and even libertarian comedians. Despite some dropping out, most will likely push forward. Some have been campaigning for quite some time now.

What's wrong with them? According to corporate media, they are Maduro allies because they don't openly support US sanctions and regime change. It's a lose-lose situation: be a shameless sycophant, or don't even bother.

The reality is that Maduro is in a strong position to win the July vote, though not by a landslide. The United Socialist Party (PSUV) has exceptional electoral machinery and solid grassroots support. As Washington preemptively disputes the possible results, one can't help but wonder what a world would look like without US imperialist threats looming over us.

Can we have truly free elections and lives free from US imperialist retaliation? Yes, we have learned to resist and are now in a much better economic situation than five years ago, but there are still days when it feels like we are strangled by a guillotine, with fate hanging by a thread.

Will the US fascist agenda claim more lives? How can we have free elections and free lives when we are already on the edge of a mental breakdown?

Many of us are not entirely satisfied with the government's liberal overtures in the name of circumventing the US blockade, moving away from the socialist alternative. We have felt neglected when expressing criticism or requesting information about salaries, socioeconomic data, and the real state of healthcare, education, and the electrical system and any investment in them.

We don't want to surrender our country to the US, but we also need guarantees about the next six years if Maduro wins. Will the government continue trapped in its echo chamber? With they weed out the opportunists and corrupt? Will the socialist project be revitalized?

Regardless of what transpires on July 28, it's the Venezuelan people who hold the power to save themselves and establish real democracy on the ground, and offer hope for the future. As Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish once wrote: "Hope is not the opposite of despair. Perhaps it is the faith that springs from divine indifference that has left us dependent on our own special talents to make sense of the fog surrounding us. Hope is neither tangible nor an idea. It is a talent."

Andreína Chávez Alava is a journalist born in Maracaibo, who graduated from the University of Zulia with a degree in journalism in 2012. She began her career as a writer and producer at a local radio station and participated in local and international solidarity struggles. In 2014, she joined TeleSUR, where she climbed the ranks to become editor-in-chief, overseeing news, analysis, and multimedia content. Currently based in Caracas, she joined Venezuelanalysis in March 2021 as a writer and social media manager and is a member of Venezuelan artist collective Utopix. Her main interests are popular and feminist struggles.

The legal authority for US sanctions against countries like Venezuela primarily lies in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), allowing the president to impose sanctions during "unusual and extraordinary threats" to national security or foreign policy. Sanctions aim to promote democratic processes, combat human rights abuses, and address "malign foreign influence." However, their implementation frequently opposes these stated objectives, as seen in Venezuela, with sanctions disproportionately harming civilian populations, contradicting claims of targeted "smart sanctions." Critics argue that sanctions serve as a tool for regime change, destabilizing governments resisting US foreign policy without regard for humanitarian consequences.

The smirk on Hillary Clinton's face, as she indirectly dismisses the electorate, mirrors the cold-hearted attitudes shown by psychopaths in crime dramas.
Hillary Clinton's remarks echo the apathy towards democracy and personal freedom demonstrated by those in power, both domestically and abroad.
The US political system, often touted as democratic, is merely a facade for the elite's bipartisan domination.
For years, the US has used its so-called democracy as a tool to maintain corporate greed, suppress opposition, and dictate global policies.
The US has been involved in Venezuela's political affairs for over two decades, repeatedly instigating free elections, regime change operations, and economic sanctions.
The trail of chaos and destruction left in the wake of US intervention in Venezuela highlights the deception behind their promises of free elections.
The corporate media, by supporting the US agenda, plays a key role in perpetuating the illusion of free elections in nations like Venezuela.
In 2018, the US maintained that the presidential election in Venezuela was fraudulent because the opposition declined to participate.
However, anti-Chavista candidates still contested the election and garnered a significant number of votes.
The election was preceded by economic sanctions targeted at Venezuela's oil industry, designed to create instability and drive popular support away from Maduro.
When these economic sanctions failed to produce the desired results, further sanctions and a full-fledged blockade were imposed.
In 2021, the media claimed that the upcoming election was happening due to a commitment by Caracas to the US to hold elections in exchange for lifting crippling economic sanctions.
This statement, however, oversimplifies the complex negotiation process between Caracas and the US-backed opposition.
The dialogue process and electoral agreement were intended to guide the opposition towards a peaceful resolution, rather than being a precondition for sanctions relaxation.
The relaxation of sanctions was not a direct result of the agreement but rather a consequence of a migratory wave returning home after years of economic aggression against Venezuela.
Additionally, the US' desire for sanctions relief was also influenced by corporations seeking to recover debt from their Venezuelan joint ventures.
The "crippling economic sanctions" were only partially suspended, with measures in the energy and gold sectors being temporarily lifted.
The ongoing threat of sanctions being reimposed hangs over Venezuela due to the US' claims that the elections are not "free."
The US is currently focusing on María Corina Machado's supposed ban on running for office, asserting that the Venezuelan people are demanding she be given the right to run.
Machado represents the elite class that is committed to upholding US economic interests and suppressing popular power, demonstrating the feasibility of socialism.
Despite Washington's support for Machado, it is surprising to see the Venezuelan left opposing Maduro while demanding her political rights over those of others.