by María L. Trigos-Gilbert
I love to say, “wow” whenever this short and meaningful word stretches itself as if it were an elastic bond in my vocal cords, from end to end. I did have my opportunity to scream a big, “WOW,” on May 14, 2000. The reason was almost amusing, so let me develop what took place in the main cathedral of the Catholic Church in Caracas, Venezuela.
During the mass service, both teams (Francisco Arias Cárdenas and Hugo Chávez Frias) divided the spiritual moment into politics and religion. We may say, “What a mixture!” Some of F. Arias Cárdenas’ followers screamed their support for their political figure. Most of the words weren’t understandable; I guess due to his followers excitement. On the other hand, the followers of Mr. H. Chávez Frias, who is the current president of Venezuela since 1998, screamed with all the strength of their lungs the following words: “¡Chávez, amigo el pueblo está contigo!”
Let me translate those words: “Chávez, my friend the people is with you!” Shouldn’t we conclude that this was like a legal-tender? Sweet and touchy, ouch! For the most part, we may say that both teams’ word-expressions were more than original pretty emotional to the political momentum that the country of Venezuela has been going through since 1998. Well, the year previously mentioned may be debatable if we consider every single event in Venezuela’s political arena. The political force then has gotten to its maximum this election year, 2000. For the most part, since 1998 Venezuela has gone through many changes, those changes have been political-constitutional.
“… Stand by Your Man …”
If we make a short review in the USA’s country music, we may find the well known song, “Stand by your man,” mighty appealing to what F. Arias Cárdenas’ and H. Chávez Frias’ followers have been doing in this political campaign during the 2000 Election in Venezuela. Each team has been standing by its man, not doubts about it. We may agree that a mass service isn’t the most appropriate place to express one’s political inclination.
On the other hand, it isn’t as if the world is coming to an end if such a holy place becomes the people’s sounding-board. I don’t think that we encounter opportunities like pennies on the streets. I’m a firm believer that we build opportunities in every step we take. So for those Venezuelans in the main cathedral of Caracas the place was better than perfect. It was very suitable, even more when it was televised. The “funny” predicament was that none of the candidates were at the mass service, but each other’s wife… the First Lady of Venezuela and the possible other first lady, Mr. F. Arias Cárdenas’ wife were.
Each lady was located in the very front of the cathedral, and both of them tried to hold themselves and tried to stay calm, in spite of each other’s followers’ excitement. I don’t have to guess each other’s prayer, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me.” Aren’t those words familiar? Not sure if they included the most important part, “Yet not as I will, but as you will.” In the end, either lady could have been easily crucified by each team’s political uproar, though each other’s followers would had fought for their “mediator’s shadow,” the First Lady and the possible first lady. Of course, if their teams would have promised what Peter affirmed to Jesus, they pretty much would have been left in solicitude. Do these statements sound dramatic? Perhaps, they do.
Yet if you were there, you would find this analogy pretty equivalent to what took place. This may sound cruel, but the only thing lacking were the bags of pop corn or cotton candy. Obviously enough, the mass service wasn’t as refreshing as it should have been. It brought a lot of controversies as it was expected after such a giant climax.
The Catholic Church
Last December Venezuela went through a tremendous tragedy, Vargas State, Miranda State, and some others states suffered quite a lot from the constant raining that Venezuela had prior to the month of December and during December. During the tragedy, the Catholic Church in Venezuelan and Mr. H. Chávez Frias remedied, at least momentarily and on the surface, each other’s antagonistic position.
I guess that to use such an adjective, antagonistic, is a bit “strong,” though that has been the situation since Mr. H. Chávez Frias won the presidency in 1998. They have been having a genuine tennis match. Something like “Díme que te diré…” Let me translate those words into English, “Tell me that I’ll tell you…” That’s like one argument after another without a break. Wonderful would be to really find out the premises for such an equal disliked from one another before we get any conclusion from this argument. If you think that this political-religious blend, mixture, has caused a lot of friction among believers, non believers, and mild believers, you are mighty right.
Certainly it has caused a definite gap between the religious and secular worlds in Venezuela. This has been like a can of juice, super concentrated. There is the need for some water to dilute this sticky and messy concentration. Now the question is from where or how is this dilution coming? Furthermore, when is this dilution coming? Some people believe that the dilution-solution will come when the elections take place. By the way, the elections in Venezuela has been postponed until further notice. The reasons for this retardation has been like grain sands on a beach, too many to count them.
So I’ll just limit myself in this paragraph to inform you about the sounded retardation of Venezuela’s 2000 presidential election. I will explain some of its most important details later on in this article, but not now. Forgive the suspense.
Is There a Real Problem?
If there isn’t a real problem between the Catholic Church and Mr. H. Chávez Frias, they are pretending quite well, pretty believable. On the previous paragraph, I stated that their arguments seem like a tennis match. Once again, the only thing lacking are bags of pop corn or cotton candy. It isn’t that we enjoy seeing them arguing. The truth of the matter is that at least we deserve a good matching.
In the end, we are intelligent people; intelligent people can draw by themselves their own conclusions without so much bureaucracy. So, could we say that intelligent people aren’t bureaucrats? For the most part, it should be true, though at times we wonder about some supposedly intelligent people. Of course, the definition of the word “bureaucrat” isn’t as bad as we have made it to be. We could reason this by knowing that there are two kinds of definitions.
The one that a formal dictionary gives us, and the other is the one that we really practice by the use we make of any given word. So let’s say that the Catholic Church represents the bureaucrats team, and Mr. H. Chávez represents the unceremonious team. This team doesn’t believe in protocol, though has to practice it from time to time to get its business done.
The Masses Speak Up
If the 80% in Venezuela represents the masses, and the masses represents the poor people, then we could say that the masses are sick and tired of some politicians and civilians echoed protocols. A sound argument may have true premises, but could be debatable. If something is debatable, there are some other possible conclusions to any type of argument.
That’s why the masses, the poor people, in Venezuela feel like fighting for a system that could respond to them according to their needs, and not according to the needs of the ones on top, the rich people or at least the pretty well-off people. For quite a while, the Catholic Church in Venezuela has enjoyed certain privileges, in the religious and non-religious arenas. The masses ask the following question to the Catholic Church, “Where were you when we needed you?”
Another possible question: “Why are you speaking up now and were so quiet before Mr. H. Chávez became the president of our nation?” Hey, many wealthy people, or at least comfortable people, and religious people in Venezuela may not like these questions, but they are honest questions and deserve honest, clear, answers. The longer the Catholic Church takes to answer these questions or questions similar to these ones, the less believable they become to the masses.
Hear Me Out!
Haven’t we felt as if some people are analyzing what we are saying, but are paying little attention to what we are really saying? Watch out: Those kind of people are out there, somewhere in the space. Believe me when I tell you that such situation is irritating and almost embarrassing! Could it be that the masses are exhausted of being analyzed by a bunch of people who claim to be educated?
I would say so. The educated, the well-off, and the rich people have forgotten this fine and important principle: People don’t care how much you know, but how much you care! Take note. So let’s suppose that Mr. H. Chávez Frias is a crazy man. Why, if he could be a crazy man, are the majority of the Venezuelans paying attention to what he has been saying before and after being elected the president of Venezuela? Why is it that he is in the first place in all the surveys made until the present day?
I would say that people have stopped paying attention to sophisticated arguments and political platforms. Being honest, I don’t blame them. I would feel the same way if I see the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer. Surely we can identify with them quite a lot! Bottom line, the masses want action, not an incomprehensible jargon.
A Presumable Position
The Catholic Church for better or for worst has represented the sophisticated arguments and religious platforms. I’m not sure who started what or when, whether Mr. H. Chávez Frias or the Catholic Church. The point resides in the fact that religion and politics don’t mix well. Of course, the mixture can be debatable or even appealing.
The truth is that politics is politics, nothing to it. Religion is religion. If any kind of religion takes an antagonist position, the parishioners (the believers) wonder about the religious people’s true intentions. Even Jesus said to Peter the following words: “Give to Caesar what belong to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.” At times we don’t feel so incline to respect all the imposed rules. If we fail to compel to those rules, certainly there may be serious consequences.
For instance, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. believed in civil disobedience, but he also understood the ethics involved. We must pay for our organized “crimes;” otherwise, we become ordinary criminals. Let’s say that the Catholic Church in Venezuela is going through a different stage called civil disobedience. The Catholic Church in Venezuela is having a hard time following commands, or serious recommendations from Mr. H. Chávez Frias invested executive power in Venezuela. Should we say that because they are religious ministers (priests, etc.), they shouldn’t face any kind of legal charges to their unfounded superiority? Should we say that Mr. H. Chávez should be a bit more lenient because in the end Mr. H. Chávez Frias is also a Catholic just as these priests are?
WOW, one little thing we must remember: Let’s keep in mind the law (legal stuff), and let’s not forget our moral responsibility. Something like a matter of ethics. The other side of the coin says, Just because Mr. H. Chávez Frias is the president, does it mean that religious ministers, priests, don’t have a single word in any of the government’s sayings, policies? Do religious people have to agree with Mr. H. Chávez just because of his executive power?
ASAP, As SWEET As Possible
Let me answer the previous paragraph questions, though I’m sure you got your own answers. Both parties, the Catholic Church in Venezuela and Mr. H. Chávez Frias, must come to terms, some sort of negotiation, though that would be like an Ideal Utilitarianism, a nonexistent wonderland. None of the parties have impenetrable legal statues that would exclude them from any kind of legal charges.
That is good news since we want everybody to be accountable for their acts. Both parties are important institutions in Venezuela which makes the situation a lot more touchy than imagined. The fact states religious groups aren’t more important than the political ministers. Neither do political ministers are less relevant than religious groups. Respect is foreign to us when we step on someone else’s toes. So we find an undesirable situation in which none of the involved parties seem to have any desire of compromising.
That’s bad news. Of course, Mr. H. Chávez Frias has stated many times that the Catholic Church cannot expect him to be muted to its verbal and written attacks toward his presidential position. That would be absurd, expecting sweetness while one is getting bitterness. The Catholic Church’s position has been influenced by those who dislike Mr. H. Chávez Frias, though with little self-foundation into any of the given arguments. No wonder, Mr. H. Chávez Frias has been perplexed and motivated by their attacks. Who’s the president of Venezuela? The Catholic Church or Mr. H. Chávez Frias? Needless to say, Mr. H. Chávez Frias.
Believe me when I tell you that my statements aren’t motivated because I may or may not favor the Catholic Church in Venezuela or Mr. H. Chávez Frias. The truth is that one cannot let arguments and statements go by, knowing that most of the people against Mr. H. Chávez Frias seem to have some sort of Intrinsic Pleasure motivating their antagonistic actions against Mr. H. Chávez Frias.
In the end, the Catholic Church is supposed to be nonpolitical, but religious. Religion and politics don’t mix well, though one may think that organized religion has a lot of policies and political tendencies. That I can’t debate since facts state the opposite.
Power: An Invisible God?
To give up some kind of power must not be an easy situation. I guess that this is what the Catholic Church in Venezuela finds like a difficult thing to do because it has been used to being on top on any regional and national issue. They wrote a public letter to the president as long as the Mississippi river.
With time the president answered them with another public letter challenging their previous size. Obviously both have acted a bit childish if we may give them so much credit. After the previous sentence, you may ask, “María, what’s your team or your favorite side?” Being honest, I’m on nobody’s side or on anybody’s team. I’m writing facts. This isn’t a matter of favoring one and disqualifying the other. I’m presenting both sides as clearly as the past and present facts allow me to write what I must.
I’m not trying to say that Mr. H. Chávez Frias is an angel or a saint, only he knows what’s inside of what I can’t see, his mind and soul. The same thought goes for the Catholic Church, only those priests know about their true intentions in their constant criticism about Mr. H. Chávez Frias presidency.
The Church Can Bring You Up…
One of Juan Domingo Perón’s problems during his second term was the great battle that he and the Catholic Church had sustained for some time, a similar tennis match like H. Chávez Frias and the Catholic Church in Venezuela. By the way, J. Domingo Perón was one of Argentina’s presidents and pretty well known.
You may remember his running mate a bit more than the runner. This running mate was María Eva Duarte, Eva Perón, or even better: Evita. Back to the point, Perón was having terrible misunderstandings with the Catholic Church. The story repeats itself, but this time in a different country with a different president. Yet the similarities are not that far apart. So the church can bring a president up, or send him to the very bottom. Let’s revise some similarities between Perón and H. Chávez Frias. Perón believed in Argentinizing the Argentines. So does H. Chávez Frias, believing in a Venezuelanized Venezuela for the Venezuelans. Perón advocated for the poor people, “Los descamisados,” the Shirtless of Argentina. So does H. Chávez Frias. So far, so good.
The comparison presents itself pretty parallel. Perón was having terrible problems with the oligarchy and the church. Once again, the picture is quite similar. Perón didn’t know too much about economics. Some people say that H. Chávez knows about economics as much as he speaks Turkish, ZERO. I hope that he knows better and does well to the country.
Pinochet’s Smart Move, but Merciless Actions
In the end, he may not know about economics, but may know some knowledgeable people in the matter. Surely this would be the smartest move that a president can make in the absence of knowledgeable ideas in the monetary affairs. That’s up to him. This is what the so hated Pinochet did in Chile.
Yes, he was disliked and is still disliked or hated, but Chile’s good economy is thanks to his good moves. He didn’t have a clue about a country’s economy, but he imported people from some USA universities who could do him the favor in exchange for some juicy salaries. So they were his most faithful advisers in the economic packages that he launched in Chile for quite a while. Of course, he had many well educated Chileans in his team.
Certainly, I must state here that I do dislike more than a lot Pinochet and even Perón. Pinochet killed too many people and among those Spaniards. Sorry, can’t deny my own blood for a juicy and prosperous economy, or to support some Descamisados. It would be like making a pact with Satan to live well on earth, but going to the mere Hell after death. So, thanks, but not thanks!
What Would Chávez Do?
Until the present time, the Constitution of Venezuela and H. Chávez Frias past and present platform reaffirm FREEDOM, DEMOCRACY. That’s what makes H. Chávez Frias different from Perón or Pinochet! This isn’t to say that he has not some weird tendencies because he indeed has. On the other hand, most presidents seem weird at first. Let’s say that they are learning the whereabouts of politics.
The thing is to learn those whereabouts as quickly as possible before the followers get tired of waiting for the needed and expected results. If H. Chávez Frias doesn’t know about economics, he would be a lot smarter if he lets the ones who know about it command the economy packages. I do think that he is letting smart people lead those roles. Another important question comes into the game: What in the heck is going on in Venezuela’s economy since some Venezuelans are not seeing any good results since he started his presidential job?
Let me put that answer in H. Chávez Frias’ style: It is impossible to bring up an economy when the country has been down the tubes for so long: 40 decades, plus. Doesn’t the argument sound reasonable? Let’s imagine that we go into bankruptcy. How many years would it take us to stand up straight and say that we are debt free and prosperous? Don’t bother to answer.
The times that I have visited Venezuela since H. Chávez Frias won the presidency in 1998, I have encountered some pessimistic people. They have told me that the country is falling apart thanks to Chávez, as he is best known among the Venezuelans, just by his last name Chávez. Couldn’t it be that this opponents are very unrealistic? Expecting the country’s economy to rise from death, from morning to night.
These opponents believe that Mr. H. Chávez Frias has been making false promises, sand castles to the poor people. Now, let’s be realistic: Name a single president who has won a presidential election by telling the truth and nothing but the truth? If you have one in mind, I’m tented to believe that you are “God” on earth. Let’s imagine this pathetic political speech from a made up candidate: Mr. Presidential Candidate says, “Dear Americans, our economy is pretty harsh in this present time. I would have to be reelected after my four years term in the presidency BECAUSE we will have many tough years ahead of us. Even more after my four years term the economy will be in a recuperating stage, we will need at least 20 years in order for us to see and feel any sort of prosperity.”
Honestly, would you vote for Mr. Presidential Candidate after this speech? For that to happen he would have to be the only running for the presidency, and it would be hard to find him a vice-president. To compete against oneself must be really boring! As funny as it may be, H. Chávez Frias said something similar to what Mr. Presidential Candidate said. He stated about the many wonderful upgrades in the financial matters, but he stated very clearly that this wasn’t a one time shot.
Many more attempts need to be made before Venezuela sees any financial stability. Remember that in this article I have mentioned Vargas State, Miranda State, and some other states’ tragedies in December 1999. When did H. Chávez Frias take executive powers? He won the presidency in 1998, and the very next year he faced tremendous pressures which no former Venezuelan president had ever faced. Many people died, and the survivors lost family members and homes. There is a saying in Spanish that says, “Después de la tormenta viene la calma.” Let’s translate this saying: “After the storm the calm comes.”
Would you believe that after a tangible storm the very last to come is the needed calm? While and after the storm took place, H. Chávez Frias has had to develop fast and new programs to help the survivors with the lost of their family members and homes. That’s not an easy task for a country that’s in need of everything. Yet Venezuela has demonstrated much civility, much strength during these hard times. That’s an example to follow, not to dislike!
If What Counts Is the Thought…
I tried to make contact with the president and the First Lady of Venezuela, Marisabel Chávez. As you may have figured it out by now, my attempts were futile because the telephone line was never answered. Go figure!
My other attempt was with the social communicator Ms. Damelis Díaz. I tried to call both parties on May 19, 2000 during the early morning. Don’t think that I tried at 4:00 A.M. I have some common sense, though at 4:00 A.M. I was more than ready to speak up my brain. I had to wait until a decent hour showed up, around 9:30 A.M. I had written all my questions, specially to Ms. Damelis Díaz because I thought that she would have more time and opportunity than the President or the First Lady. What a joke!
I called her, left a message, my telephone number in Venezuela, and said a short message, but alas she NEVER called me back. Let’s say that she was Ms. Important, too important to call back a “simple” folk.
These were my questions to Ms. Important… OOPS, I meant Ms. Damelis Díaz.
1. Ms. Damelis Díaz, do you believe that the upper or middle class in Venezuela is H. Chávez Frias’ major opposition? If so, why? Or if not, who then?
2. Why don’t social communicators seem to favor H. Chávez Frias in any of their articles in the newspapers or on TV?
3. Since you have interviewed the First Lady, Mrs. Marisabel Chávez, how does it feel to be next to the First Lady asking her so many important questions, but even more so many private and touchy questions?
4. You said in one of your interviews that the president’s lack of protocol has misled some people to the point that they disrespect him quite a bit, at least his opponents. Do you disrespect the president because he doesn’t believe in protocol? Do you base your opinion about someone for how they look, for what they say, for how they act in general, for all the above, or for one in particar? Can you justify your answer?
5. Ms. Díaz, how do you picture the political panorama after the “Mega-elecciones,” Super-Elections?
6. About what human rights violations are some people talking that are taking place in Venezuela? Please, be as specific as you can since this is an oversensitive subject, nationally and internationally of great importance.
Those questions were never answered because she never called me back. I waited and waited, and really thought that she was going to call me back. Alas, she did not! So, I will do my best to answer those questions, taking out the bull and taking the bull by the horns. If my answers don’t please Ms. Damelis Díaz, whose fault is it? Certainly, it wouldn’t be my fault because I did try my best to get in touch with her, in order to get her answers.
Question #1. I do believe that the elite of Venezuela are the number one opposition of H. Chávez Frias. Why? Just because, because. They may feel left out and threatened, economically threatened by Mr. H. Chávez Frias’ and his official representatives’ policies.
Question #2. I don’t have a clue. Some people say, including the social communicators, that H. Chávez Frias has tried to manipulate them, has tried to control their articles or televised programs. The other side of the coin is that they dislike his past and present platform.
Question #3. I don’t know how Ms. Damelis Díaz felt interviewing the First Lady of Venezuela because I wasn’t there to testify about it now. Only Ms. Díaz could have given us the needed answer.
Question #4. I don’t know what Ms. Damelis Díaz looks into a person in order to give respect. I do think that Ms. Díaz is super well schooled, but I cannot guarantee that what’s important to me in order to give respect would be the same thing for Ms. Díaz to give respect to a person. By the way, I hate any kind of protocol. If the president has gotten out of the usual style, that’s fine with me as long as H. Chávez Frias does his job as the president of Venezuela.
Question #5. I find the Venezuelan political panorama promising after the 2000 election because for once and for all, at least for a good while, Venezuela will have a president concentrated in his presidency, rather than in his candidacy. The many selections of governors and some other types of political roles in the Venezuelan society will bring some clarity to all political matters. Finally, the Venezuelans will really know and understand their whereabouts, socially, politically, and certainly economically.
Question #6. Some people believe that killers have rights. Okay. They do. So what? Too bad, the dead people cannot speak up to really say what we indeed think. It’s dangerous to think that it would be a good idea if Venezuela establishes Capital Punishment. Many people like me, believe that if that takes place, many innocent people would end up dead. That’s true. That could happen. This could happen specially at the beginning since life is a matter of trial and error. Perhaps, in the future things could get well established to the point of applying such legal severity to those who really deserve such an ultimate punishment.
The other side of the coin says that criminals in Venezuela are getting literally out of hand. So people are begging for a quick solution or implementation of law. Okay, the president and the respective institutions in the country have tried to put a quick end to these criminals because people fear at all times. It doesn’t matter if it is daylight or night. The situation is still the same. Okay, the president and the respective institutions start to confront the difficult situation… BUT there is always someone yelling, “HEY, WHAT ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS?” Should the president and the country’s institutions scream back, “YEAH, WHAT ABOUT IT?” I’m sorry, but anyone’s right END, FINISH, as soon as that person steps on someone else’s right, like the right to live and live freely without fearing if today he or she is going to be robbed, killed, raped, or who knows what! So, the human rights in that respect can go to where they came from, from NOWHERE.
Blind Case Example
Imagine a well-known person; I won’t say who, what, or when. Well, I take that back. I would at least say that it took place here in the USA, during the decade of the 90s. He was a very well known person, strong, tall guy. He killed someone who used to be pretty close to him. The law let him walk out. That’s one case. Now, imagine, for real, really imagine thousands of SUPER SIMILAR cases.
How would you feel? If finally the police and the president start to put a quick end, which doesn’t necessarily mean a criminal’s death without a trial, why would anyone be yelling, “HEY, WHAT ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS?” Believe the following: The one yelling has never experienced to be robbed, raped, or lost a family member in that situation. Usually that person lives between books, from one book to the next. Little that person knows about the struggle that the normal folks go trough every single day of their life. Please, do not take me wrong.
I’m not saying that criminals don’t deserve a trial, and a fair trial. I’m saying that no one has the right to put anyone’s life in jeopardy just because he or she happens to want what you, anyone, or I have—whether one’s body or material possessions, period. If criminals have the right to live, honest citizens have the same right. My mother always says that the bad thing about accidents isn’t death itself, but the possibility of being left crippled.
Let’s not think that a criminal’s wrong doing is an accident, but the analogy still works in the matter of being left crippled—mentally traumatized besides the physical evidences. Justice is blind, too bad we are the ones with eyes. Criminals don’t get affected. They get retribution. Let’s not forget that!
“HEY, WHAT ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS?”
“YEAH, WHAT ABOUT IT?”
It’s difficult to bring a simple conclusion because what’s taking place in Venezuela isn’t simple at all, at least in the political arena. The only decent and right thing to write is that I do believe in Democracy! I do think that H. Chávez Frias has tried to put into practice a democratic government. It hasn’t been an easy task for him in all aspects. He has had too much opposition, which indeed is good and healthy to a certain extend. Otherwise, one’s head could get too big, and one’s accountability would be faulty.
Certainly that’s the last thing that we could wish to happen. The Catholic Church, and H. Chávez Frias must come to terms before late comes too late. In the end, we do not want believers among believers fighting against each others for political reasons with such passion that may take out any reasonable debate or reconciliation. The social communicators need to put their act together as well as H. Chávez Frias since democracy also brings as a result freedom of speech. Freedom of speech can’t be negotiated to what social communicators can or cannot say, though a little respect to the president wouldn’t be a bad idea, at least from the Moral Law perspective, a matter of Ethics. After all life isn’t such utilitarian, and a lot less life is like math.
Life is at times a bit abstract, and from there we may take it. Nothing is so pure or so impure in order to cast out any doubts with much simplicity. Life is a bit more complicated than that. There has to be a true reconciliation. As they say, “Okay, we don’t agree, but we can still be friends, or at least act civilized like true human beings using in an active manner their reasoning.” Isn’t this what differentiates us from wild or domesticated animals? Believe me when I tell you that nature gives us a better example of harmony than us with our corpulent package of laws.
If any Venezuelan reads this article, I request you to put aside your differences to look for the similarities. What unites us is bigger than our differences, we are more alike than different. That’s a fact. Don’t believe me? Look around, and someone like you may find. I’m not talking about a copycat, or even a soul mate. I’m talking about those big and little things that attract us from one another.
Venezuela is you, and you are Venezuela. We are Venezuela. Even if you are a North American, an American, you must be concern about Venezuela’s present and future because it’s part of the world. The world, we are the world. Wasn’t that a song’s theme? What a mighty truth!