Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador (PCMLE)

The election results do not change the course of history

The elections of February 17 recorded concrete results that were not what we were hoping for.

These results have been exaggerated by Correa, his supporters and the reformists and opportunists in Latin America and the world.

According to this view, Correa is the president who will remain the longest throughout the history of the Republic, with the longest continuous rule.

The election results gave him about 56% of the valid votes, that is, the same as he received in the second round in 2006 when he beat Alvaro Noboa with the support of the whole left, and five points more than the 51% he received in 2009. It is said that this is an unprecedented landslide victory. Actually Correa obtained 4,918,137 votes out of the 11,675,000 Ecuadorians eligible to vote, that is, 42%; Jaime Roldos obtained 68% of the vote in 1978.

The results for the Legislative Assembly were substantially higher than those achieved in 2009, and now, thanks to the D'Hondt method of distribution [a system of proportional distribution of seats favoring larger parties – translator’s note], and to gross fraudulent manipulation of the vote tally sheets, he won 52% of the valid votes, 35% of the eligible voters and has 73% of the seats in the Assembly.

These results show a movement of votes from the traditional right wing towards Correa, reducing the votes of the Social Christian party, of PRIAN (Noboa’s party), of the Patriotic Society party of Lucio Gutierrez, and also of some of the voters of the left .

This victory of Correa confirms the defeat of the traditional right, which continues to be divided, but which nevertheless obtained 24% with Guillermo Lasso.

We, the revolutionary left, the Plurinational Unity of the Left (UPI), were defeated.

The ticket of Acosta – Caicedo [President and Vice-President] took 6th place and their assembly lists were close to 5%.

The balance of power is shifting towards a confrontation among three forces: first, the social democratic, demagogic and populist proposal of supporters of Correa; second, the old parties of the bourgeoisie, led by an "new" form of the CREO [Creating Opportunities] party and the banker Lasso who make up the bourgeois opposition, which calls itself civilized and, third, the popular opposition made up of popular and national social organizations, of political organizations and parties of the left from which we are building the UPI .

Participation in the elections of representative democracy, a form of struggle

Representative democracy is one of the highest expressions of bourgeois democracy, through which the fiction is created that the masses decide who will rule for each period of time; it legitimizes through elections the political power of one of the factions of the ruling classes.

For the proletarian revolutionaries it has always been clear that one cannot win people's power through elections; it is also well understood that elections represent a space of political struggle for power, a scenario in which it is necessary, under present conditions, to actively participate and use in a revolutionary way to advance the process of accumulating forces.

From these positions we Marxist-Leninist Communists of Ecuador have been participating since we formed as the PCMLE. Our participation was always active; several times we called on people to cast a blank ballot, given that we workers and people did not have candidates; we have also been supporting candidates of the left, primarily the comrades of the MPD [Democratic Popular Movement].

We view elections under representative democracy as a space in which to present the revolutionary alternative, as a scenario to build and shore up the unity of the working classes, of the peoples and nationalities of Ecuador, of the youth, the progressive intellectuals, the parties and organizations of the left. This is a form of struggle that allows us to put forward our programmatic proposals and eventually gain representation in the organs of bourgeois institutions, the local governments, parliament, even the presidency of the republic. We understand these different spaces as tribunes to push revolutionary politics to new levels and in various ways; from the National Assembly and the municipal councils our comrades push forward the defense of the people’s rights and achievements, the denunciation of corruption and abuses of the people; from the mayoralties and prefectures we advocate meeting the expectations of the voters and fulfilling our program, demonstrating our ability to lead society. The struggle for the Presidency of the Republic that we have been conducting presupposes seeking an electoral victory to advance the implementation of the program and to open the perspective of the struggle for the seizure of power.

We conceive the electoral struggle as a confrontation between the revolutionary positions and the reactionary proposals of the ruling classes; recently, since the coming into office of Correa-ism, as an ideological and political battle between revolution and reformism.

In the February elections we were one of the forces that joined in building the Plurinational Unity of the Left, alongside the comrades of the MPD, Pachakutik [PK], Participation, People’s Power, Montecristi Lives, Revolutionary Socialist Current and Network of Ethics and Democracy, forming an electoral project whose standard-bearers were Alberto Acosta and Marcia Caicedo, and constituting lists 15-18 for the National Assembly and the Andean Parliament and struggled to carry them to victory.

Correa’s project is a capitalist one that seeks to be realized for the long term

The advent of Correa’s government is the result of a long accumulation of struggles of the workers and peoples, of the patriots and revolutionaries, of the left. It did not arise, as the President and his acolyte boast, as a result of his leadership and charisma.

To form a government and lead and promote the project of a “modern capitalism," Correa-ism has been using double-talk: he claims to be a democrat and patriot but carries out an authoritarian and sell-out politics; he proclaims change, the "citizens' revolution", "20th century socialism," but he maintains the economic and social structure unchanged, he guarantees the interests of big business people and bankers who have made the largest profits in history and are appropriating the wealth created by the workers.

Correa-ism is building a project that is seeking to impose itself for a long time (thirty years or more, as Correa himself says). It is expressed as a political and ideological project that has managed to captivate a large sector of the population with the offer of change, of modernization, of meritocracy and academic excellence. It is a model of management that prioritizes the State and weaves an ideologized social network with a demagogic discourse that promises redemption in peace, "the revolution of the vote." It forms a conglomerate which is grateful for public assistance programs and is captivated by the many public works. It uses great economic resources derived from oil exploration and the high price of oil to build this project; in the near future it will have income from large-scale and open pit mining, for which it gave out unconstitutional and illegal contracts and is reforming the Mining Law.

The governmental administration of Correa-ism aims at favoring the popular sectors of the city and countryside using the great resources available, to build a social base of an electoral character that lets it win elections, as it has been doing through eight electoral processes.

Some neoliberal policies have been put aside, such as the privatization of health care, education and social security. The State is assuming these responsibilities and a good part of the population has benefitted from the "free" health care and education (actually it has decreased the costs, it provides school supplies, uniforms and school breakfasts, it has stopped charging for medical care and provides some of the medicine). These policies have a significant impact on the impoverished social sectors and the middle strata.

It has been developing an aggressive welfare policy, bonuses and subsidies aimed at the impoverished sectors of the city and countryside, such as the so-called "Human Development Bonus" that distributes $50 a month to some 2 million people, as well as the various assistance programs, "Ecuador Feed Yourself," the “agricultural Kit", "partners for the forests," credits, the sale of fertilizer at a reduced price, housing credits, etc., etc. These activities that emphasize the action of the government, governors, mayors and presidents of parish councils allow him to count on the gratitude of the beneficiaries, who support him at the polls.

Visible public works have been carried out that are modernizing the country and ultimately favour large-scale production and businesses of national and foreign capitalists: a major road network, first class highways, bridges, ports and airports have been built that are expressions of governmental administration. Hospitals and schools, judicial centers, prisons and government buildings have also been built. Large hydroelectric enterprises are arising. These are material works that require large public investment and an aggressive foreign indebtedness that has been carried out with China for the short term and with high interest rates. These public works are sold as an expression of the development and modernization of the country, as the work of Correa, which have not been carried out before.

Correa-ism has a large propaganda machine, the mass media: television, radio and the press; it has political and material resources that allow it to use the big channels, the Saturday programs and broad publicity that is distributed by all the media. (Supposedly he is fighting the mass media of the bourgeois opposition but he maintains them through abundant official propaganda. According to market research the state is the main buyer of ads.)

The ability of Correa-ism to take by assault, by any means, the control of the jurisdictional functions, of the National Assembly (through outright buying of votes), of the supervisory agencies: Comptroller, Citizen Participation Council, People's Ombudsman, the National Electoral Council, Court of Electoral Litigations and the Constitutional Court. (The competitions called to fill these agencies were blatantly rigged, questions were distributed to selected supporters.) Blackmail and the buying of mayoralties and prefects, etc. enable him to build an all-powerful state controlled by the plans of the President.

Correa’s government team consists of young technocrats from the Catholic University and FLACSO [Latin America Faculty of Social Sciences in Ecuador], as well as from noted U.S. and European universities, including officials of the former Social Christian and Christian Democratic governments, of the government of Gutierrez as well as one or another former leftists and former guerrillas who "were reborn" on the path of the revolution. This team is building up a modern and concentrated capitalist state that guarantees the interests of national and foreign capital and, at the same time, through handouts and propaganda, through coercion and fear and the demobilization of the masses.

Correa-ism is building a political party, Alianza Pais (Country Alliance), which is organized and functions around the thinking, word and the will of Correa, and brings together a broad social and political spectrum, activists who come from the recalcitrant right, the Social Christian Party, from social democracy and Christian democracy, from the populism of Bucaram and Gutierrez, from renegades of revolutionary organizations, even former members of left-wing parties and organizations; it is a real ideological and political rainbow. The electoral base and members of Alianza Pais is made up of men and women from the poor sectors of the city and countryside, from the middle classes and strata, but obviously it is not a multiclass party,1 as some Correa-ists claim; it is a party of a strongman built around one personality and led by that strongman.

Rafael Correa’s personality, built up as a strongman who uses television and the dais, who has the ability to communicate with the masses, who uses direct words to sing the praises of the poor, who meet the demands of the people, the humble ones, who lashes out bitterly with words against the oligarchy and the imperialists, who attacks with insults and diatribes the union representatives, the fighters of the left, the indigenous people and revolutionaries, is the main instrument of Correa-ism to win electoral support, so far, of most of the Ecuadorians.

Correa has managed to build his image of a personality who keeps his promises, who does things for the poor, who does not seek personal gain, who proclaims that the acts of corruption that are uncovered in his government are the work of secondary officials, infiltrators from the old parties of the oligarchy; in the case of his brother he compares himself to Abel and his brother to Cain; if his cousin is a crook, then Correa was the first to be deceived; if his vice president is a plagiarist, it is an invention of the opposition and the corrupt press. He has achieved a high degree of credibility that excuses his authoritarianism and even corruption with the shield of the work carried out. With this myth, Correa has the ability to distract attention from the allegations made and to talk about other issues.

Correa-ism was established thanks to the demagogy, cronyism, authoritarianism and repression of the unions, the organizations, the indigenous movement and the social and environmental activists as the alternative that achieved political stability of the country; he left behind more than a decade of political crisis and instability, of "ungovernability." He boasts of being the mastermind who put a brake on the trade union struggle of the workers, the demands of the teachers, the demobilization of the students, of having put an end to work stoppages and strikes, social protests and demonstrations. From this viewpoint, he is providing a great service to the ruling classes and imperialism. He guarantees the interests of those above and maintains social peace.

He sought to have this project endorsed in the February elections and, as we have seen above, he succeeded.

Correa's victory is an expression of the ideological offensive of populism and reformism and the advantage provided by the electoral machinery

In an extremely unequal political electoral battle the machinery of the Correa-ist project was imposed.

Promoting the work of the government, drawing on the social base captivated by the proclamations of the "citizens' revolution" in the hundreds of thousands of grateful poor (the beneficiaries of the poverty vouchers alone number about two million), in the middle strata convinced by skin-deep changes, by political stability, in the business benefiting from the "social peace," from the elimination of strikes and walkouts of the workers and youth, he promoted by all means that he was transforming the country, that the political parties of the oligarchy and the bankers no longer rule, that the trade unionists no longer make demands or blackmail, that they now rule through him, the people. He endlessly proclaims that the victory of his opponents would have meant a march to the past, that no one can stop the change.

Through this speech and an aggressive propaganda campaign of millions of dollars he captivated the vote of the Correa-ist trend, including of the discontented; he was able to build the image of a successful landslide candidate, and winning the undecided voters who up to two weeks before the elections were over 25%.

In fact, Correa developed an ideological offensive which sold the idea that the highways and bonuses constituted the  change, the "citizen's revolution", the "21st century socialism," with which he managed to discredit and thrash the candidacies of other sectors of the bourgeoisie, Lasso, Gutierrez, Noboa and Rodas. With anti-communist and reactionary concepts, with insults against revolutionary violence he managed to beat the alternative of the unity of the left.

Through a legislative majority produced by perks and blackmail, he violated the Constitution of Montecristi, changed the electoral rules in an untimely manner, so as to ensure his victory, he changed the legislative elections to the first round, imposed the D'Hont method of distribution of seats, through deception and the majority of the Citizen Participation Council he nominated a National Electoral Council consisting of members of his party, who were completely unconditional to him, which allowed him to violate the rules that he himself established whenever necessary.

He established a powerful electoral machine that utilized at his discretion all the material resources available to the State, to the President of the Republic, the ministries, governors, political commanders and deputies, mayors, governors, prefects and parish boards; he used the offer of works and jobs as well as blackmail of layoffs and non-renewal of contracts for public servants and the teachers; he deceived the recipients of the poverty voucher with chicanery that if he did not win the election they would lose their vouchers; through the integration of election boards with 100% affiliates of Alianza País he orchestrated the election fraud that allowed him to inflate the presidential results and ensure the election of a legislative majority.

He developed an aggressive campaign in which insults and the disqualification of adversaries predominated, he particularly directed his poison darts against the Plurinational Unity of the Left and more specifically against the MPD and its main candidates. Correa was a candidate who bitterly confronted all the other candidates and did not get from the main standard-bearers of the left the deserved response that those who were disenchanted and dissatisfied with Correa-ism expected.

The bourgeois opposition participated in a fragmented manner and was defeated

The February elections confirmed what had happened in 2006 when Correa defeated Alvaro Noboa in the second round with support from the left and the indigenous movement, the whole process of the referendum on the New Constitution. The old parties of the oligarchy, despite efforts to give them a new look, could not overcome their fragmentation and they presented themselves with several options that were once again defeated.

The candidacy of the banker Lasso and his new party came in second with 24%. The total of all representatives of the bourgeois opposition was about 40% of the valid votes.

Lasso is a representative of the big pro-imperialist bourgeoisie; he shows himself as a moderate right-wing politician, he proposes to be a constructive opposition, he is the alter ego who will allow Correa-ism to simulate the effect of democracy and tolerance.

The plurinational unity of the Left lost an important battle but not the war. The struggle continues!

The program of the Plurinational Unity of the Left [UPI] fought hard to achieve a significant result in the presidential and assembly elections.

We had recently gained strength. The political struggle of the workers, the peoples and the left wing that formed the Coordinator for the “No” in the referendum of 2011 achieved important results, it led to the victory of the “No” in 12 provinces.

It is true that the social organizations, unions, associations, communes and cooperatives, that the left-wing parties, the MPD and the PK suffered hard blows from Correa-ism. It is also true that the rank-and-file of the social movement and the left has resisted and is fighting back; mainly the indigenous movement, the teachers’ organization and the workers’ movement have to their credit harsh victorious battles, the last of which was the great "march in defense of life, water and dignity of our peoples" that set out from Zamora and ended in Quito on March 22, 2012.

A first achievement of the determination and will of social organizations and movements, of the various leftist political organizations, was the formation of the Plurinational Unity of the Left that was born in the heat of discussion and the determination to fight for real change.

An important result was the holding of primaries among the various organizations, which where held with the debate, consultation and determination of the rank-and-file throughout a tour of all the provinces by six pre-candidates candidates presenting their proposals, which culminated on September 1 in Guayaquil, choosing comrade Alberto Acosta as candidate.

A new and victorious result was the campaign to defend the legal registration of the MPD and the PK, which Correa tried to eliminate. In three weeks, in a real popular group effort, the PK collected more than 80,000 signatures and the MPD collected more than 115,000 membership cards.

The formation of unitary lists for the members of the national assembly, the Andean Parliament and in 22 of the 24 provinces reaffirmed the decision and will to march united in this election.

Basically, the Plurinational Unity of the Left was a project that united its members, that called them into struggle and built conditions to develop initiatives and activities.

However, misunderstandings and cracks appeared during the campaign itself, in the development and distribution of propaganda; jealousy was evident among some of the candidates. Moreover, the campaign taught us great lessons; we learned to walk together, to resist in a united manner the offensive of Correa-ism and the rest of the bourgeoisie, to strike at the enemies of the people in a unified manner.

The human and material resources of the Plurinational Unity of the Left were small, very limited compared to the apparatus of Correa-ism and the money from the bankers and banana growers. We competed as one against a hundred. The inequality was abysmal.

Under these conditions, the election results were a loss for the Plurinational Unity of the Left. The vote achieved by the presidential and vice-presidential candidates, Acosta and Caicedo was very small, a little over 3%. The vote for the lists, although they bordered on 5%, showed a decrease in those voting for the MPD and PK, which in previous elections reached about 9%. The number of assembly seats fell from 10 to 5. Among the assembly members elected there is no member of the MPD; they all belong to PK. The most serious results were the defeat suffered in Esmeraldas and Cotopaxi, until now bastions of the MPD.

The magnitude of the loss is very serious, especially for the MPD since the PK essentially preserved its share of assembly members and reaffirmed its strength in its areas, the provinces with significant indigenous population.

In analyzing these results we note:

• We were facing a powerful enemy with small political and materials forces

• Correa used all the human and material resources of the state, used and abused the institutions and propaganda resources with the complicity of the CNE

• He could a channel a social base into reformism proclaimed as change, as a "citizens' revolution"

• He coerced, blackmailed and bought the vote of public servants, of beneficiaries of the poverty voucher and other welfare benefits

• He bitterly confronted the bourgeois opposition and virulently and persistently confronted the Plurinational Unity of the Left, especially the MPD.

• The bourgeois opposition participated in a fragmented manner

• We, the Plurinational Unity of the Left participated enthusiastically, we toured around the whole country and where we could go directly we received the acceptance and support of the masses

• The program of the UPI corresponds to the present and medium-term interests of the workers and peoples, to the defense of sovereignty and natural resources; it is an anti-system program that that proclaims social change. However, we could not express that program in ways that synthesized and symbolized the proposal.

• We did not have the ability to develop and distribute massive propaganda that could reach millions of voters. Above all we have deficiencies in designing and developing propaganda that could interpret, synthesize and propel the imagination of the masses, in line with the development of the media technology. Essentially we showed ourselves in our social base.

• There were signs of lack of coordination in the development of the campaign.

• The political confrontation that characterizes election campaigns in Ecuador, the virulence of the President as candidate did not get a timely response from the standard-bearers of the campaign who focused on the presentation of the programmatic proposal.

• A portion of the UPI voters chose the alternative of tactical voting; they assumed that the prospects of the president and vice-president were not good and they would have to vote for whoever emerged as a rival of the president as candidate in the runoff election. Some of the UPI voters were captivated by Correa’s left-sounding discourse.

• In Esmeraldas, we should note, the offensive of Correa-ism comes from long ago, it is the diatribe exhibited by the President who, besides slander and lies relies on restricting the municipal revenue of the Finance Ministry, hindering the provincial and municipal work. However, the responsibility for not responding systematically, of not exposing the lies, of not adequately promoting the work of the local governments, of neglecting the direct link of the party with the masses, of allowing the deterioration of the popular organization is ours and we must self-critically correct this and recover our positions.

• In Cotopaxi the diatribe and slander against our comrades and against the work done institutionally, as well as the trials for terrorism and sabotage, were not answered properly, and this allowed for the deterioration of our image, and above all diminished the dynamism and forcefulness of our electoral campaign.

Unity, an important step in the process of accumulation of revolutionary forces

Regardless of our poor election results we can state that the working masses, the peoples and nationalities, the youth this time took us a big step forward. We reached a new level of unity.

The formation of the Plurinational Unity of the Left is the point we have arrived at for the desire for unity that was latent in the minds of the working classes, among the nationalities and peoples, in the ranks of the left-wing political organizations and parties.

In the past there were various experiences. On different occasions we came together in the streets to defend our rights, to fight for freedom and sovereignty. In the national strikes we fought together. In the popular uprisings we struck together at the enemies of the people, although we could not unite in purpose and outcome.

This time, from all the trenches we felt the need for unity and worked to build it.

From the beginning the policy of the government was directed towards dividing the popular movement, to fragmenting the left-wing parties and organizations, to openly identify them as the main enemies of its project. To a large degree it has been able to co-opt social and political leaders, to divide various social organizations, to confuse significant sectors of the working masses and youth.

We had to fight to defend democratic liberties, the rights of the workers and peoples; we had to confront the deceit and demagogy that developed from Correa-ism in the name of the "citizens' revolution" and "21st century socialism."

In the process to a large degree, a discussion was begun on the need and urgency of unity. We moved from discussion to action. We were baptized in the Referendum of 2011. Undoubtedly, despite the adverse election results, the desire for unity has taken root among the broadest popular sectors, it remains a need and a duty of social and political activists, it is still alive in the theory and practice of the left-wing political parties and organizations.

As a consequence of the electoral defeat, the discussion on unity is stirring among all the participants of the UPI. To a large extent, this discussion is being won by the unitary positions.

Certainly there are voices and positions that question the process of unity, that blame the MPD and the Marxist-Leninist Communists for the electoral failure under the Correa-ist onslaught that demonizes us. Some claim that without the MPD the results would have been different. The discussion is clarifying the situation, unity is taking shape. Basically, all the political organizations have confirmed their decision to continue moving forward.

There are difficulties to overcome, errors to correct and problems to resolve; there are sworn enemies of unity working to undermine it. But above all, unity is an indispensable necessity for the liberation struggle and, above all it will continue to be built, it will grow amid the struggle and in the end it will win.

Subjectivism permeated our views and activities

Voters of the left wing, the social base of the UPI, friends and sympathizers, members and the leadership at all levels have asked us uneasily about the causes and reasons for the electoral defeat, because from our analysis of the progress of events and particularly of the election campaign and our participation in it and we repeatedly concluded that we were advancing and that the expectations of victory in several provinces were certain.

This situation calls for a many-sided analysis that we intend to make:

We made the evaluation that Correa had worn himself out before the voters due to the unmasking of the many acts of corruption of his government, his ministers, senior officials, of the bribery and embezzlement that were denounced every day; we understood that the most recent and much talked about case of his cousin, Pedro Delgado, who fled the country with the personal consent of the President recognizing the falsification of his degrees, and that the accusation of plagiarism of his vice-presidential running mate, had seriously affected him; that he was losing ground among the teachers and public servants, among the organized workers because of his authoritarian and repressive politics; that he was recognized as a liar because of his public contradictions.

Throughout the election campaign we assumed that our program and our candidates were well-received among the popular sectors, that we were expanding our political limits.

Indeed, these evaluations had a basis in fact. However, we did not have the ability to analyze the development of the events, the turns that they took, the weight of the "green steamroller" that succeeded in winning over the undecided voters in the final stages of the campaign; the impact of Correa’s anti-communist offensive and of the whole governmental propaganda machine against the Plurinational Unity of the Left and, particularly, the viciousness with which he insulted and condemned the MPD, its main representatives. The term “violent,” that we were "stone throwers," that we were saboteurs and terrorists we saw as an expression of the fact that we were advancing and that was why we were attacked. Without being aware of the impact of this attack, we did not respond in a timely manner.

From reaction, the right-wing, social democracy and opportunism the diatribes pointing to us as "vandals, as irrational people, as lacking proposals, as opposed to everything, as stone throwers," did not have as much weight in the recent past since a part of the masses and public opinion understood and even justified them. One must remember that a good part of the oppressed, the homeless, those struck by the employers and the state were looking to us to help them. This situation continues to take place, of course, on a smaller scale. Accepting these ideas we failed to gauge the weight of the preaching of pacifism and order under the conditions of a demagogic discourse and of intense government welfare programs; and therefore we did not have the ability to shield our social base, to divert the Correa-ist onslaught and to move to the counter-offensive by explaining the revolutionary nature of our policy and organization, the reason and validity of the struggle, the legitimacy of the trade union organization, the need for social change and the falsehood of the Correa-ist demagogy.

Our analysis was based, fundamentally, on the behavior of our forces and of the social sectors which we approached directly, and basically it was correct, we did not take into account the evaluation of the whole society and of the process, we were one-sided. Some comrades took over-confident attitudes that decreased the intensity of the campaign.

The social revolution has not taken place, it continues to be necessary

Correa-ism never tires of proclaiming that the country is changing, that the "citizens' revolution" is building "the good life," that the oligarchies no longer rule in Ecuador, that "capital can not be above labor, that it cannot be more important than people."

Indeed in Ecuador today changes are taking place. Nobody denies that. Much less can or should we communists do that.

Dialectic is stubborn, nothing remains static. Everything is moving, everything changes.

Ecuadorian society has been and will be constantly changing. What is important to know is what kind of changes are taking place.

Capitalism is systematically developing in the country; clearly capitalist development is tied to dependence on international monopolies. Before Correa-ism the country’s main trading partner was the U.S., the principal creditors were U.S. and Western European banks. Now the U.S. continues to be the main trading partner but, to some extent, imperialist China has entered into competition as a seller, as a lender, as an investor. The country has contracted a debt of more than 7,000 million dollars with China at high interest rates and under conditions prejudicial to national sovereignty. The essence of the change is not aimed at reducing the dependence on foreign capital, it is heading towards diversifying the imperialist masters and partners.

We are witnessing a significant degree of modernization of the infrastructure, we see how the road network is expanding, how buildings, ports and airports are being built, how the country is being flooded with cars, how consumerism is growing.

Certainly the high income from oil operation and exports are allowing Correa-ism to use part of the public money for his welfare policy which, to some degree, relieves the difficult situation of the poor but by no means takes them out of poverty. The changes are skin-deep and are being promoted in order to secure a social base.

Obviously, since 2006, the rise of Correa to office is producing some political changes. The main one among these is the adoption of the Constitution of Montecristi that, due to the pressure of the masses and despite the brakes of the President, could integrate in its articles advanced democratic principles that are now being violated by Correa-ism and they are trying to change them.

The transformations that they are touting with much fanfare are renaming the institutional agencies, so that the national congress is now called the National Assembly, the Court of Constitutional Guarantees is now called the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal is now the National Electoral Council and instead of representing the parties with the most votes it is now made up of members of the ruling party, among others.

The structural changes are nowhere to be seen. The changes that are taking place are an expression of the evolution, of the development of capitalism.

Let us provide some pearls that, as they are essentially expressions of the President and his lackeys, they have the value of legal aphorisms as "confession as part of evidence."

The SENPLADES2 not only points out that it is still the model of accumulation, but that it has increased the reliance on raw materials and the profit-making character of our economy: "(...) the development of the country remains focused on oil and the export of raw materials: 71% of the country's productive apparatus continues to be in the production of raw materials, 8% in services and only 21% in the production of industrial goods. In 2006, 56% of total non-oil exports were of raw materials, a percentage that increased in 2011 to 61%. The weight of manufactured exports, which have more added value, declined in five years. In 2006 it was 40% of total non-oil exports. In 2011 it was 36%."

The monopoly concentration of wealth has grown during the period of Alianza País: "In 2007, when the government of Rafael Correa began, 50 economic groups had incomes of nearly $15,000 million dollars. This represented 33% of Gross Domestic Product, GDP, which in that year reached $44,000 million. Four years later, in 2010, the Internal Revenue Service certified the existence of 75 groups. These had obtained revenues of more than $25,000 million. And their economic impact accounted for 43.8% of GDP, which in that year was $58,000 million. A growth of 10 points."3

In an interview with Orlando Perez, a well-known Correa-ist, the President says:

O.P. How anti-capitalist is the political project of Alianza PAIS and Rafael Correa?

R.C. "I hate that word. I think that is one of the mistakes of the traditional left is to be "anti-everything." These are some things that scare the young people: the intellectuals, these anachronisms, or that a worker does not use his intellect. We must overcome these concepts, these criteria. We are not anti-capitalist, we are not anti-Yankee, we are not anti-imperialist; we are for social justice, for dignity, for sovereignty. And one of the mistakes of the supposedly hard left, with its contradictions – as we were talking about before this interview – is that they are now defending commercialized means of communication to appear in pictures, but they are anti-capitalist, they are against private property, etc., these are their contradictions. One of the errors of the traditional left – that even Cuba is already correcting, is to have rejected the market, rejected space for the modern capitalist economy, that sector be rejected – at least in the medium or short term – or our economies would collapse. So it is necessary to have socialism, to seek social justice, the democratization of the means of production, etc.., but understanding that we must have a modern capitalist segment because, if not, the economy will suffer." (The emphases are added.)

In the same interview he said:

"Basically we are doing things better with the same accumulation model, rather than changing it, because it is not our desire to do harm to the rich, but it is our intention to have a more just and equitable society."4

The revolutionary struggle develops in zigzags

The electoral defeat is also a political, ideological and organizational one; it affect us in all areas and at all levels. Perhaps the greatest loss is in the political arena.

Some people are saying that the left, and especially, the revolutionary left, we Marxist-Leninist Communists, have been destroyed, that we don’t have a political space in the country. Pessimistic voices have concluded that we are beaten, cornered and that recovery will take many years, perhaps decades. Others point out that Correa-ism is affirmed and will last for a long time, that it has captured the masses and therefore the social revolution has been delayed indefinitely. There are those who say that Alianza País, Correa and his supporters have given rise to a long-term project, similar to the one carried out by the PRI in Mexico after the revolution of 1810.

Objectively there is a new situation: reformism has been reaffirmed in the government, it has been fed by the opportunists, it has a ideologized and grateful social base that will continue to support him. He appears as the victor, as all-powerful, millions of voters support him; he frightens and coerces many others. He appears as the representative of the triumphant current in Latin America and, apparently, will be around for a long time.

Certainly we have suffered a serious defeat, that a part of our social base is dispersed or being dispersed, it is true that we appear before public opinion, the working masses and the youth as the losers. It is clear that there will be a number of members and social sectors that are demoralized. This we cannot and should not deny.

But it is also clear that the rank-and-file of our forces has dealt with the blows and has the disposition to resist and work for a speedy recovery.

The February election results gave the victory to reformism and opportunism. We revolutionaries suffered a setback, but in no way does this mean that the course of history has changed. It means that the future battles of the workers and peoples must develop in a more complex ideological and political scenario that prioritizes the confrontation between the ideas of the social revolution and the proposals of the "citizen's revolution." between the banners of socialism in the 20th century and the falsehoods of "21st century socialism."

The country continues to be a dependent, backward state, tied to the capitalist mode of production, to the most backward forms, to mining industry, a economy based on raw material; the workers and peoples continue to be subjected to the exploitation and oppression of the bosses; their essential problems: work, health care, education, social security, food, shelter and insecurity continue to be insoluble; they demand urgent attention and neither Correa-ism nor other servants of the ruling classes can provide them. Change can only come from the revolution and socialism. The rest are fables that will soon be unmasked.

We still exist, small and weak, but we have roots among the workers and peoples, among the youth. We rely on the correctness of our conceptions, on Marxism-Leninism, in the validity of our politics, on the need for social revolution, on the existence of the historical subjects of the revolution, the working class, the other laboring classes, the peoples, youths and progressive intellectuals.

The course of history must necessarily be one of constant struggle of the working class for its liberation. In these days many battles, large and small, will be fought; in some we will win victory and in others we will suffer losses. Inevitably, one day we will win the war, establish people's power and build socialism.

Over several decades we communists have fought for power, we have carried out actions using various forms of struggle and we will continue to do so.

The February elections left the MPD in condition of reprimand, since it did not achieve 4% of the valid votes. This situation demands a tenacious and persistent effort, full of initiatives to defend the legal registration in the next election, which will be held in the first quarter of 2014 to renew the regional governments, prefectures, mayoralties and parish boards. It is a big challenge before which we must properly prepare our forces and work selflessly for the recovery of our revolutionary positions in the electoral arena.

Correa-ism and the President appear as giants, as invulnerable, as invincible and omnipresent. In reality they have a power that we must take into account, that we must not underestimate. But they are by no means eternal or invincible.

They have created a project that aims to make the social and national liberation vanish, that shores up capitalism and the country's dependence: therein lies its greatest weakness and temporary character. The revolution and socialism are a historical necessity that one day will overthrow capitalism and imperialism. Correa-ism has cracks and contradictions, it is vulnerable and, sooner or later, it will be unmasked and thrown into the dustbin by the revolutionary struggle.

In these new conditions we proletarian revolutionaries must display initiatives. To new problems we must provide new answers. To demagogic methodologies that have gained footholds in the understanding of the poor we must respond with proposals and actions that will reclaim the role of the masses, the validity of our revolutionary proposals in the immediate and medium terms. To the divisive and diversionary policies of reformism we must oppose the unity of those at the bottom, of the workers, of trade unionism, we must develop the ingenuity to discover and create new forms of organization and struggle, new ways of developing propaganda, of countering the reactionary lies. Faced with the criminalization of the social struggle, the persecution and prison we must close ranks in defense of social fighters, of the revolutionaries, to broaden solidarity.

Pablo Miranda
Ecuador, March of 2013


1) Such so-called “multiclass” parties do not exist except in the imagination of the leaders of reformism. The definition of “multiclass” that is based on the social composition of its members and voters in reality corresponds to all political parties that exist in society. According to Marxist theory, a political party is an ideological, political and organizational expression of the interests of a social class or a fraction of a class, independent of the social composition of its members. A political party always defends the conceptions and interests of its leadership.

2) National Secretariat of Planning and Development.

3) Revista Vanguardia (Vanguard Journal): The Boom in Economic Power, number 327, February 6, 2012.

4) President Rafael Correa, Interview, The Telegraph Daily, January 15, 2012

Click here to return to the Index, U&S 26