Venezuelan protest overrun by government forces.

[happyslug]

122. Those photos appears to be from Tachira

State of Tachira, is one of those states within Venezuela where support for Chavez has always been weak, mostly do to the fact it was the area where most of the oil of Venezuela was located. The Bolivar Oil Field in Western Venezuela is the 6th largest oil field in the world, that is how big in was when it first went into production in 1922. The Bolivar Field presently is in rapid decline, with sections completely depleted (which has NOT help the region or the central government). A lot of the opposition to Chavez in the western part of Venezuela is a refusal of people in that area to blame their economic decline on the decline in oil production they prefer to blame Chavez and his party (Sounds like West Virginia and coal, and that is a good comparison).

More on the Bolivar Field. the field in the West of Venezuela:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivar_Coastal_Field

?w=300&h=254
http://deepresource.wordpress.com/2012/06/15/venezuela-now-holds-largest-oil-reserves/

Venezuela is banking on the Orinoco Belt for its future oil exports, but the oil in that belt is some of the heaviest and sourest oil in the world. Now most of the oil around the Gulf of Mexico is Heavy Sour oil and thus most of the refineries in Texas and Louisiana can handle such oil, the question is at what costs and how much the Refineries in Texas and Louisiana will have to upgrade themselves to be able this even heavier and sour oil from the Orinoco belt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orinoco_Belt

Yes Mexican and Venezuelan oil is refined in Texas and Louisiana, then shipped back to both countries for internal use. Both countries have some refining capacity but not enough to meet internal demand, thus the crude is shipped to Texas and Louisiana on sea going barges and then returned as refined oil products.

More on the State of Tachira:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A1chira

If you look at an election map, it is on the border with Columbia and one of the few states with extremely high opposition to the present government of Venezuela, That can be seen in the 2012 election involving Chavez:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_presidential_election,_2013

In the 2013 election, the only map I found used states not local results, again it shows that state going with the opposition:



Thus the area where these photos were taken is an area with high opposition to Chavez and his party. It is also an area in decline, do to the decline in oil production do to their main oil field becoming more and more depleted (The same thing is expected to happen to Mexico, as
Cantarell oil field goes into further depletion):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantarell_Field

Cantarell peaked at 2.1 million barrels of oil a day in 2003, but is presently producing less then 400,000 barrels a day, a over 75% drop in production. Some of that production has been made up by Ku-Maloob-Zaap field, but it appears to have peaked at 850,000 barrels a day. It is expected to stay at that level to 2017 then go into rapid decline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku-Maloob-Zaap
http://mexicooilandgasreview.com/interviews/interview8_1.html

I bring up the Mexican fields and West Virginia to show that when a decline in production of something declines do to natural causes (depletion of oil in Mexico and coal in West Virginia) people living in those areas rarely blame nature, they blame the government. That appears to be behind the fighting in that city, it is blaming Chavez for the decline in local oil production for such decline in production, in their opinion, can NOT be caused by nature but by Government action.

You saw this in Russia in the late 1980s early 1990s, unrest caused by inherent problems, but instead of blaming the actual cause, they blamed the Government. Now in the case of the Soviet Union, part of the problem was the Soviet system, but Yeltsin's "Reforms" caused even further decline and unrest till Putin replaced Yeltsin and ended Yeltsin's "Reforms", accepting those that worked and undid those that were obvious failures. Russia has been on the upbeat ever since. You have protests in Russia, but the Government is secure, unlike Yeltsin in the 1990s.

The same thing happen during the Arab Spring, the price of Grain went up, do to a world wide shortage of grain (Russia had a drought and to keep grain prices in Russia low, Putin forbade exports, The five main grain exporting countries are the US, Canada, Australia, Argentina, and Russia. Poland, Kazakhstan and the Ukraine, while not in the league of the big five, are also major exporters of Grain. Poland, Kazakhstan, the and the Ukraine, all suffered the same drought Russia did, so all reduced grain exports. The US reduced grain exports as the US turned to gasoline made from Corn. This reduction in US grain production affected Canadian exports of grain to countries other then the US, so Canadian exports out side of the US declined. That left Australia. Argentina, and other small grain exporters to pick up the slack, which they could not do, thus demand exceeded supply so the price went through the roof. We in the US did not see the affect of the price that much for grain price is a small part of the food items we purchase (we do not make our own bread, we buy it ready made for example).

That grain price increase had a huge affect on that area of the world that imports the most food, North Africa and the Middle East. Iran and Iraq are the most self sufficient in that area of the world, and thus had the least problems during the Arab spring. The rest of the "Arab" world went into severe unrest. Leading to the over throw of the Governments of Tunisia, Libya and Egypt and the near overthrow of several of the Arab gulf kingdoms (saved from the unrest of their subjects by Saudi Arabian Troops and/or money).

Like the unrest that lead to the fall of the Soviet Union, such unrest is often taken over by any group of organized opposition. This is what Lenin did in 1917, he took hold over the on going revolution and lead it the way he wanted it to go. Hitler did the same in 1933, the Nazi's NEVER won a Majority of the votes, till they were already in power, but were the largest organized group (The Communists were second and thus most Nazi attacks were on the Communists, for the Communists were in the second best place to take over the ongoing German Revolution).

Lenin is quoted on saying all he needed to take over a government was a well organized group of people of about 5% of the total population. His Bolsheviks were such a group in the fall of 1917. Mussolini's fascists were such a group in 1922. Hitler's Nazi's were such a group in 1933.

You do NOT need 50% of the population to do a revolution, what you need is 50% of the population wanting change, and your 5% providing the only real alternative to the ruling elites.

That is the situation in Venezuela, the opposition wants unrest and also want to be the only alternative to the present government. They do NOT need 50% of the voters to vote for them, all they need a a solid 5% of the people willing to fight to put them in charge AND the Government losing the faith of the people it is ruling.

Right now, it appears that the unrest part is working, but it is also appearing that Nicolás Maduro Moros (To give his full name) does retain support among those people in the lower classes of society. As long as that is the case, he will stay in power (as did Yeltsin did in the 1990s for he lost power only as it became clear to the lower classes his programs were NOT working for them). The opposition has its 5% of hard core supporters and another 30-40% of people willing to join the protests (Which is what Hitler had in 1933 and Mussolini had in 1922).

The problem is the majority of the people continue to see the Government of Nicolás Maduro Moros with respect and support. The Unrest is suppose to undermine this support (as it did to the Government of Kerensky in 1917 and to the Weimar Republic in 1932 and 1933 and Italy in 1921-1922). So far the unrest had failed to undermined the present Government.

A comparison can be made with the Ukraine. The government of Viktor F. Yanukovych had won the previous election, but the support of the voters was very weak. When the protests started, the people who voted for him, were NOT going to go in the Streets to fight for him. Thus you had a Government people would vote for, but not fight for.

On the other hand, the opposition consisted of about 30% out and out Fascist elements from the Western part of the Ukraine. The majority were NOT Fascists, but the key organized group was. When the Police decided they needed army support to put down the protesters (and the army decided it was to divided to take a stand for or against the Government, a problem with a draftee army, which tends to reflect what the people of the Country want). The Police then just gave up after the shooting (which appears more and more to be the work of the opposition not the Government of Viktor F. Yanukovych).

If that sounds like how Hitler took over Germany in 1932-1933 you would be correct. Hitler retained more of the image of being elected as opposed to taking over, but the street fighting by the SA under Hitler was much like the protests done in the Ukraine over the last couple of months (Hitler also did not try to kill off the previous members of the Government, instead he took them into his government, but Hitler had no reason to kill off the leader of the existing German Government, unlike the opposition in the Ukraine who made his removal an important plank in their revolution, much like how the opposition to the Tsar in the February 1917 revolution demanded that he be removed from power).

Just a comment on context, what is happening in Venezuela appears to be a repeat of 2002 in Venezuela, what happened in the Ukraine, and the above mentioned revolutions. The 2002 Coup failed for the supporters of Chavez were willing to go into the Streets and fight FOR HIM. The revolution in the Ukraine succeeded for the people who voted for Viktor F. Yanukovych were NOT going to fight for him.

The real question in Venezuela will the people who supported Chavez in 2002, support Maduro in 2014? That is an important question for during the German Revolution of 1918-1921, the German Army refused to fight for the Kaiser, but the German People did fight for the Wiemar Republic against both reactionaries and Communists. in 1933 the German People refused to fight for the Wiemar republic and we ended up with Hitler. Thus a change of a dozen years may change why a people will fight. In Italy in the early 1920s it just took a couple of years, till 1922 for Mussolini take over, when the people of Italy decided it was not worth the effort to fight for the existing government of Italy.

Right now, it appears Maduro has the support of the people who voted for him, they appear to be willing to fight, thus the bloody pictures you produce. In most countries that would turn people against their government, but it appears Maduro support is solid. Remember, like the opposition, Maduro does NOT need 50% of the people in a fight with the opposition, but that more people of Venezuela are willing to fight for him, then against him. Yanukovych never had that level of support in the Ukraine, thus he was overthrown, Maduro appears to have that level of support and thus I expect him to stay in power.