Velazquez spent over 60 years as one of the principal leaders of Mexican unions and 50 years as head of the Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM). He drew the unions into a close relationship with the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and the Mexican state. He was twice elected Senator for the PRI.
Velazquez defended the PRI and the state against every progressive social movement that arose in the last 60 years. Velazquez backed the PRI-state in crushing the industrial union movement of the 1940s, supported the PRIgovernment in using the Mexican Army to break the railroad workers strike in 1959. He backed the PRI-government's use of the army in the massacre of 300 12 International Viewpoint #291 recover from the shock it suffered under
Dahik. As a result, the ambitious privatisation programme ran in to objections from within the elite, which combined with resistance from below, to block the programme.
Stability
For the elite, the "problem" with
Bucaram and his government was that its excesses threatened the continued hegemony of the bourgeoisie. To restore "governaate unionism Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM) students at Tlatelolco in 1968, and supported the smashing of the electrical workers union and the Democratic Tendency in 1975. It was Velazquez who first called for expelling Cuauhtemoc Cardenas and the Democratic Current from the PRI in 1987. Velazquez also opposed the Chiapas Rebellion of 1994 and the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) which led it.
Throughout his career, Velazquez was an opponent of all rank and file initiatives from below, and squashed any signs of independence or autonomy on the part of the workers. Under Velazquez the CTM became famous for "protection contracts," negotiated to protect employers from more militant unions, for "ghost unions," known only to the state and the bosses and unknown to the workers, for the use of gangsters and thugs to beat and even assassinate democratic or independent movements. By the 1990s, Mexicans were the lowest paid industrial workers in the world, most earning between three and ten U.S. dollars per day.
Velazquez's square head, darkrimmed glasses, and big cigar became over the decades a symbol of the conservative, corrupt, and violent labour bureaucracy, and of the most reactionary sectors of the Institutional Revolutionary Party. Velazquez came to be seen as the biggest and oldest of the "dinosaurs," who represented all that was worst about Mexican labour unions and politics.
Velazquez's successor as head of the CTM, Leonardo Rodriguez Alcaine, 78 years old, continues the policies of his predecessor. But Rodriguez Alcaine may find that the CTM organisation begins to crumble beneath him, now that "Don Fidel" is gone. * Source: Mexican Labor News and Analysis tel. (525) 661-33-97 www.igc.apc.org/unitedelect/ e-mail [email protected] bility," the ruling class now wants those on the bottom to join an active consensus with those in power. The popular opposition is condemned to return to its previous virtual non-existence.
The massive Popular Consultation (referendum) was a skilful mix of questions. First came the ratification of the removal of Bucaram by the Congress, under popular pressure. Question two ratified the election of Alarcón as President, again by Congress. These questions are two sides of the same coin - Media hammered home the message that a yes vote on both questions was the only way to ensure stability, and prevent Bucaram from returning to power.
Alarcón invoked the need to send reassuring signals to foreign investors. But his main preoccupation was to strengthen his already powerful government, which is already determined both to implement the "required" neo-liberal reforms, and deal with an signs of "anarchy" from the popular masses. Not surprisingly, since Bucaram was toppled, there has been a growth of partial struggles, particularly a long strike by public health sector workers.
Alarcón hoped that a yes vote in the referendum would not only legitimise him, but reduce the popular legitimacy which those who led the radical currents during the February movement still hold. In other words, the government proposed the referendum not just to weaken Bucaram, but also to weaken the left-wing coalition PachakutikNuevo Pais, the only force which represents a left opposition to the new regime. Pachakutik called for a no vote on the second question.
To try to maximise popular support during this period, the Alarcón government has increased import tariffs (to the displeasure of the "international community,") and created a new Secretariat of Indian Affairs. Results
For the government and media of Ecuador, the poor hardly even exist. Those in power showed little interest in the 40% of citizens who did not bother voting in the referendum. Though these were the same people as marched in the streets on 5 February.
Nevertheless, the deep effects of the February mobilisation did show through. • Over 74% of voters approved the destitution of Bucaram. • The February movement called for a National Constituent Assembly to draft a new constitution. A partial victory was achieved with the 59% support for proposal three in the referendum, which called for a National Assembly to do the same. This will provide some scope for popular mobilisation, though less than in the initial demand for a Constituent Assembly. • A majority of voters reiected the main parties proposal to restrict proportional representation in parliamentary elections (Question 7). This will help block the creation of a rightist political monopoly.
----- panel printed with this article -----
See also Miguel Angel Granados Chapa's El siglo de Fidel Velazquez, Mexico: Pangea, 1996.
in close collaboration with business interests. • A majority of participants voted to include the people's right to depose their rulers in the constitution.
On the negative side, 65% ratified Alarcón's election. This has enabled the new President to present himself as the unique representative of the popular mandate of February Sth. Apart from Pachakutik, and, for their own reasons, parts of the establishment led by Vice-President Rosalía Arteaga, there was little real opposition on this question.
Candidates for election to the National Assembly must be proposed by parties and political movements. This obviously represents a defeat for the social movements and citizens' groups. The right has majority control over the Supreme Electoral Tribunal. This too will ensure the continued hegemony of the major parties.
So why did most ordinary people vote the way their enemies wanted them to? Assuming that they bothered to vote at all, of course. Mainly because they had no clear alternative before them. No proposition which would have maintained the radical democracy of the February movement. As a result, when facing uncertainty and crisis, and without "their own" political organisations to act as a reference point, people vote for whoever seems to offer stability. The left fails to present an alternative
The left, in Pachakutik-Nuevo Pais, failed to establish a credible mass leadership, both during and after the February mobilisations. We administered our own little preoccupations, and were unable to make an overview of the interests of the whole popular movement. As a result, we contributed to the strengthening of the clientelist, reformist and parliamentarist phenomena